- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 6,001
- Reaction score
- 13,695
- Points
- 113
The Official Thread Dedicated to "Trump Winning"
- Thread starter Tim Steelersfan
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 15,600
- Reaction score
- 6,219
- Points
- 113
So it opened OK for you also?
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 6,001
- Reaction score
- 13,695
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 21,851
- Reaction score
- 24,833
- Points
- 113
For as much **** as he gets for spouting off,there's a decent human being that pops out still..
Trump can charm at appropriate times. He is known for that. He has a lot of experience on tv, in show biz. He sets the tone when being questioned. Experience.
Look who is being groomed to be tv ready. Ro Kanna, Crockett and AOC.
I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.
Look who is being groomed to be tv ready. Ro Kanna, Crockett and AOC.
I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.
He cracks me up. In the funny way, not the deranged libtard left insane way. (Right, OFTB?)
HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY TO ALL, INCLUDING THE SCUM THAT SPENT THE LAST FOUR YEARS TRYING TO DESTROY OUR COUNTRY THROUGH WARPED RADICAL LEFT MINDS, WHO ALLOWED 21,000,000 MILLION PEOPLE TO ILLEGALLY ENTER OUR COUNTRY, MANY OF THEM BEING CRIMINALS AND THE MENTALLY INSANE,THROUGH AN OPEN BORDER THAT ONLY AN INCOMPETENT PRESIDENT WOULD APPROVE, AND THROUGH JUDGES WHO ARE ON A MISSION TO KEEP MURDERERS, DRUG DEALERS, RAPISTS, GANG MEMBERS, AND RELEASED PRISONERS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD, IN OUR COUNTRY SO THEY CAN ROB, MURDER, AND RAPE AGAIN — ALL PROTECTED BY THESE USA HATING JUDGES WHO SUFFER FROM AN IDEOLOGY THAT IS SICK, AND VERY DANGEROUS FOR OUR COUNTRY. HOPEFULLY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, AND OTHER GOOD AND COMPASSIONATE JUDGES THROUGHOUT THE LAND, WILL SAVE US FROM THE DECISIONS OF THE MONSTERS WHO WANT OUR COUNTRY TO GO TO HELL. BUT FEAR NOT, WE HAVE MADE GREAT PROGRESS OVER THE LAST 4 MONTHS, AND AMERICA WILL SOON BE SAFE AND GREAT AGAIN! AGAIN, HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY, AND GOD BLESS AMERICA!
HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY TO ALL, INCLUDING THE SCUM THAT SPENT THE LAST FOUR YEARS TRYING TO DESTROY OUR COUNTRY THROUGH WARPED RADICAL LEFT MINDS, WHO ALLOWED 21,000,000 MILLION PEOPLE TO ILLEGALLY ENTER OUR COUNTRY, MANY OF THEM BEING CRIMINALS AND THE MENTALLY INSANE,THROUGH AN OPEN BORDER THAT ONLY AN INCOMPETENT PRESIDENT WOULD APPROVE, AND THROUGH JUDGES WHO ARE ON A MISSION TO KEEP MURDERERS, DRUG DEALERS, RAPISTS, GANG MEMBERS, AND RELEASED PRISONERS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD, IN OUR COUNTRY SO THEY CAN ROB, MURDER, AND RAPE AGAIN — ALL PROTECTED BY THESE USA HATING JUDGES WHO SUFFER FROM AN IDEOLOGY THAT IS SICK, AND VERY DANGEROUS FOR OUR COUNTRY. HOPEFULLY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, AND OTHER GOOD AND COMPASSIONATE JUDGES THROUGHOUT THE LAND, WILL SAVE US FROM THE DECISIONS OF THE MONSTERS WHO WANT OUR COUNTRY TO GO TO HELL. BUT FEAR NOT, WE HAVE MADE GREAT PROGRESS OVER THE LAST 4 MONTHS, AND AMERICA WILL SOON BE SAFE AND GREAT AGAIN! AGAIN, HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY, AND GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Nothing says winning like Harvard soon bending the knee.
This is long, but a tremendous objective read by Harvard alum Bill Ackman.
It has saddened to me watch @Harvard, a university that I love from which I have greatly benefited, self-immolate through gross mismanagement, poor governance, and ideological capture that have occurred over the last 15 or so years, and that have been brought into clear focus beginning on October 8, 2023.
When a day after the launch of the Hamas attack on Israel, 33 Harvard student organizations held the victims “solely responsible” for the acts of the terrorists while their extraordinarily barbaric acts were still underway, I realized that something had gone profoundly wrong at my alma mater. Further investigations on campus, including interviews and meetings I held with students and faculty, led me to conclude that the issue was not simply one of anti-Zionism or antisemitism, but rather the anti-American ideological capture of a once-great educational institution that has grossly veered from its original mission of Veritas and academic and research excellence.
For nearly two decades, Harvard students have been taught that the world can only be understood as a battle between the oppressors and the oppressed, a dangerous anti-American neo-Marxist ideology that emerged on campus, permeated the administration and the faculty, and one which has been promulgated and implemented by Harvard’s Orwellian-named Office of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging.
While the OEDIB has recently been renamed the Office for Community and Campus Life and has taken down its website in an attempt to avoid scrutiny from the @realDonaldTrump administration, it has otherwise remained under the same leadership, personnel, and mission.
Rather than promoting the issues suggested by its nomenclature, in practice, DEI as implemented at Harvard is a political advocacy movement that advocates and executes on behalf of certain groups that are deemed oppressed under the DEI methodology. Under DEI, one’s degree of oppression is determined based upon where one resides on a so-called intersectional pyramid of oppression where whites, Jews, and Asians are deemed oppressors, and a subset of people of color, LGBTQ people, and/or women are deemed to be oppressed.
Under DEI’s ideology, any policy, program, educational system, economic system, grading system, admission policy, (and even climate change due its disparate impact on geographies and the people that live there), etc. that leads to unequal outcomes among people of different skin colors is deemed racist.
As a result, according to DEI, capitalism is racist, Advanced Placement exams are racist, IQ tests are racist, corporations are racist, or in other words, any merit-based program, system, or organization which has or generates outcomes for different races that are at variance with the proportion these races represent in the population at large is by definition racist under DEI’s ideology. But rather than being anti-racist, DEI and its ideological framework are profoundly racist and illegal, and an important to contributor to what has gone wrong at Harvard in recent years.
DEI has poisoned Harvard admissions practices as evidenced by Harvard being found in violation of race-based admission practices by the Supreme Court. It has led to the decline of excellence and meritocracy at Harvard, both in the student body and in the faculty. It has allowed antisemitism to explode on campus where chants for “Free, Free Palestine, From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free, and Globalize the Intifada,” were dismissed as viewpoint diversity and free speech “depending on the context” by the previous Harvard President despite repeated warnings that such calls for global violence would lead to innocents being harmed.
The irony of Harvard claiming to protect free speech and free expression on campus while contemporaneously being ranked last on the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) free speech rankings has not been lost on anyone.
This past week’s brutal executions of a Christian and a Jewish staffer of the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C. by a man who shouted “Free Free Palestine” after finishing off his victims as they attempted to crawl away are but a recent stark and egregious example of the consequences of the same intonated calls for violence against Jews by Harvard students and faculty who have encamped on Harvard Yard and barged into classrooms bullhorns in hand.
Harvard has had nearly two years to get its act together to address antisemitism on campus, and it has been more than 18 months since the Congressional hearing at which Harvard’s former president equilibrated, ducked, smirked at, and dismissed Congresswoman Elise Stefanik’s penetrating and elucidating inquiry.
While the University has taken token steps to address these issues, the April 29th release of its Presidential Task Force on Combating Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias makes clear that antisemitism remains pervasive on campus because of its deep ideological roots within the faculty as explained by David Volpe (a Visiting Scholar at the Harvard Divinity School who resigned from Harvard’s Antisemitism Task Force) in a Free Press article on May 2, 2025 after the publication of the report:
“But what the report offers no solution for is that there is a deep ideological commitment among much of the faculty—particularly in the humanities and social sciences—that is anti-Western, anti-Israel, and often antisemitic… Without a vast unlearning—among the faculty, not just the students—all the reports in the world will not change the atmosphere on campus. We will only be spraying perfume on a sewer.”
I have recently visited the Harvard campus and spoken to students and faculty. Unfortunately, while the University has taken some steps, David Volpe is correct. The rot runs deep.
Harvard has been on notice for nearly 18 months by the Congress that its failure to address antisemitism threatened the University’s federal funding. The University now appears to be shocked – despite the many previous warnings made by the Trump administration – that its Federal funding has been paused, that future Federal grants will not be considered, and that its refusal to provide requested documentation about its foreign students has led to the cancellation of Harvard’s Student and Exchange Visa Program certification.
Why is Harvard in this mess? The answer I believe is arrogance.
Harvard’s President Garber recently held a Zoom with alumni and claimed that the administration’s attempts to enforce Title VI violations is simply a ‘guise’ for the ideological takeover of the University by right wing interests.
Rather than engage with the Administration and attempt to negotiate a resolution of these issues, Harvard has chosen to dismiss the Administration’s attempt to enforce the law as pretextual and brought lawsuits not just against the various Federal agencies, but also has chosen to personally sue Secy of HHS RFK, Jr, AG Pamela Bondi, Secy of Education Linda McMahon, Acting Administrator of the GAO Stephen Ehikian, Secy of Energy Chris Wright, Defense Secy Peter Hegseth, Secy of DHS Kristy Noem, Director Todd Lyons of ICE, Secy of State Marco Rubio, and the Directors of the NSF and NASA.
When one brings a lawsuit against an individual when litigation against an entity would legally suffice, it is done to intimidate, harass, and/or waste the time of the target. Harvard had no legal need to bring personal lawsuits against these public servants, but it did so anyway out of spite....
This is long, but a tremendous objective read by Harvard alum Bill Ackman.
It has saddened to me watch @Harvard, a university that I love from which I have greatly benefited, self-immolate through gross mismanagement, poor governance, and ideological capture that have occurred over the last 15 or so years, and that have been brought into clear focus beginning on October 8, 2023.
When a day after the launch of the Hamas attack on Israel, 33 Harvard student organizations held the victims “solely responsible” for the acts of the terrorists while their extraordinarily barbaric acts were still underway, I realized that something had gone profoundly wrong at my alma mater. Further investigations on campus, including interviews and meetings I held with students and faculty, led me to conclude that the issue was not simply one of anti-Zionism or antisemitism, but rather the anti-American ideological capture of a once-great educational institution that has grossly veered from its original mission of Veritas and academic and research excellence.
For nearly two decades, Harvard students have been taught that the world can only be understood as a battle between the oppressors and the oppressed, a dangerous anti-American neo-Marxist ideology that emerged on campus, permeated the administration and the faculty, and one which has been promulgated and implemented by Harvard’s Orwellian-named Office of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging.
While the OEDIB has recently been renamed the Office for Community and Campus Life and has taken down its website in an attempt to avoid scrutiny from the @realDonaldTrump administration, it has otherwise remained under the same leadership, personnel, and mission.
Rather than promoting the issues suggested by its nomenclature, in practice, DEI as implemented at Harvard is a political advocacy movement that advocates and executes on behalf of certain groups that are deemed oppressed under the DEI methodology. Under DEI, one’s degree of oppression is determined based upon where one resides on a so-called intersectional pyramid of oppression where whites, Jews, and Asians are deemed oppressors, and a subset of people of color, LGBTQ people, and/or women are deemed to be oppressed.
Under DEI’s ideology, any policy, program, educational system, economic system, grading system, admission policy, (and even climate change due its disparate impact on geographies and the people that live there), etc. that leads to unequal outcomes among people of different skin colors is deemed racist.
As a result, according to DEI, capitalism is racist, Advanced Placement exams are racist, IQ tests are racist, corporations are racist, or in other words, any merit-based program, system, or organization which has or generates outcomes for different races that are at variance with the proportion these races represent in the population at large is by definition racist under DEI’s ideology. But rather than being anti-racist, DEI and its ideological framework are profoundly racist and illegal, and an important to contributor to what has gone wrong at Harvard in recent years.
DEI has poisoned Harvard admissions practices as evidenced by Harvard being found in violation of race-based admission practices by the Supreme Court. It has led to the decline of excellence and meritocracy at Harvard, both in the student body and in the faculty. It has allowed antisemitism to explode on campus where chants for “Free, Free Palestine, From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free, and Globalize the Intifada,” were dismissed as viewpoint diversity and free speech “depending on the context” by the previous Harvard President despite repeated warnings that such calls for global violence would lead to innocents being harmed.
The irony of Harvard claiming to protect free speech and free expression on campus while contemporaneously being ranked last on the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) free speech rankings has not been lost on anyone.
This past week’s brutal executions of a Christian and a Jewish staffer of the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C. by a man who shouted “Free Free Palestine” after finishing off his victims as they attempted to crawl away are but a recent stark and egregious example of the consequences of the same intonated calls for violence against Jews by Harvard students and faculty who have encamped on Harvard Yard and barged into classrooms bullhorns in hand.
Harvard has had nearly two years to get its act together to address antisemitism on campus, and it has been more than 18 months since the Congressional hearing at which Harvard’s former president equilibrated, ducked, smirked at, and dismissed Congresswoman Elise Stefanik’s penetrating and elucidating inquiry.
While the University has taken token steps to address these issues, the April 29th release of its Presidential Task Force on Combating Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias makes clear that antisemitism remains pervasive on campus because of its deep ideological roots within the faculty as explained by David Volpe (a Visiting Scholar at the Harvard Divinity School who resigned from Harvard’s Antisemitism Task Force) in a Free Press article on May 2, 2025 after the publication of the report:
“But what the report offers no solution for is that there is a deep ideological commitment among much of the faculty—particularly in the humanities and social sciences—that is anti-Western, anti-Israel, and often antisemitic… Without a vast unlearning—among the faculty, not just the students—all the reports in the world will not change the atmosphere on campus. We will only be spraying perfume on a sewer.”
I have recently visited the Harvard campus and spoken to students and faculty. Unfortunately, while the University has taken some steps, David Volpe is correct. The rot runs deep.
Harvard has been on notice for nearly 18 months by the Congress that its failure to address antisemitism threatened the University’s federal funding. The University now appears to be shocked – despite the many previous warnings made by the Trump administration – that its Federal funding has been paused, that future Federal grants will not be considered, and that its refusal to provide requested documentation about its foreign students has led to the cancellation of Harvard’s Student and Exchange Visa Program certification.
Why is Harvard in this mess? The answer I believe is arrogance.
Harvard’s President Garber recently held a Zoom with alumni and claimed that the administration’s attempts to enforce Title VI violations is simply a ‘guise’ for the ideological takeover of the University by right wing interests.
Rather than engage with the Administration and attempt to negotiate a resolution of these issues, Harvard has chosen to dismiss the Administration’s attempt to enforce the law as pretextual and brought lawsuits not just against the various Federal agencies, but also has chosen to personally sue Secy of HHS RFK, Jr, AG Pamela Bondi, Secy of Education Linda McMahon, Acting Administrator of the GAO Stephen Ehikian, Secy of Energy Chris Wright, Defense Secy Peter Hegseth, Secy of DHS Kristy Noem, Director Todd Lyons of ICE, Secy of State Marco Rubio, and the Directors of the NSF and NASA.
When one brings a lawsuit against an individual when litigation against an entity would legally suffice, it is done to intimidate, harass, and/or waste the time of the target. Harvard had no legal need to bring personal lawsuits against these public servants, but it did so anyway out of spite....
Last edited:
Continued from prior post...
What more do you need to know to understand why President Trump and the other leaders of this Administration would be appropriately angered by this dismissive and extremely antagonistic response of Harvard?
My goal is to help Harvard out of this mess, but I have been stymied in doing so. Multiple Harvard affiliates have suggested that I reach out to the Harvard Corporation Board, and I have done so. I have received no response to my outreach to the members of the Board with whom I have had a (perhaps once) good relationship. A number of others have offered to connect me with President Alan Garber or have told me that he would be reaching out to me shortly, but no such outreach has occurred; hence, I am herewith sharing my advice to Harvard.
So what should Harvard do?
While much has been made of the Administration’s April 11th letter to Harvard which was clearly overreaching in certain respects, I am relying here on the April 3, 2025 letter from the Administration rather than the April 11th letter, as the Administration has explained that the April 11th letter was sent in error. (See: https://nytimes.com/2025/04/18/business/trump-harvard-letter-mistake.html)
The April 3rd letter https://documentcloud.org/documents/25879226-april-3-harvard-preconditions-letter/ makes nine reasonable and straightforward requests:
“1. Oversight and accountability for biased programs that fuel antisemitism. Programs and departments that fuel antisemitic harassment must be reviewed and necessary changes made to address bias, improve viewpoint diversity, and end ideological capture.
2. Disciplinary reform and consistent accountability. Harvard has an obligation to consistently and proactively enforce its existing disciplinary policies, ensuring that senior administrative leaders are responsible for final decisions. Reforms must include a comprehensive mask ban (with medical and religious exemptions, given identification is always displayed) and a clarified time, place, and manner policy. Harvard must review and report on disciplinary actions for antisemitic rule violations since October 7, 2023.
3. Student group accountability. Recognized and unrecognized student groups, and their leadership, must be held accountable for violations of Harvard policy.
4. Governance and leadership reforms. Harvard must make meaningful governance reforms to improve its organizational structure to foster clear lines of authority and accountability, and to empower faculty and administrative leaders who are committed to implementing the changes indicated in this letter.
5. Merit-based admissions reform. Harvard must adopt and implement merit-based admissions policies; cease all preferences based on race, color, or national origin in admissions throughout its undergraduate, graduate, and other programs; and demonstrate through structural and personnel action that these changes are durable.
6. Merit-based hiring reform. Harvard must adopt and implement merit-based hiring policies; cease all preferences based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in hiring throughout its teaching and research faculty, staff, and leadership; and demonstrate through structural and personnel action that these changes are durable.
7. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs. DEI programs teach students, faculty, staff, and leadership to make snap judgments about each other based on crude race and identity stereotypes, which fuels division and hatred based on race, color, national origin, and other protected identity characteristics. All efforts should be made to shutter such programs.
8. Cooperation with law enforcement. Harvard must cooperate with law enforcement to ensure student safety.
9. Transparency and reporting to ED, DHS, and other federal regulators. Harvard must comply fully with existing statutory reporting requirements under Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, commit to full cooperation with DHS and other federal regulators, and make organizational changes as necessary to enable full compliance.”
None of the April 3rd requests are unreasonable. and all appear to be lawful. Furthermore, the nine requirements would likely be welcomed by the substantial majority of faculty, students, and alumni of the University....
What more do you need to know to understand why President Trump and the other leaders of this Administration would be appropriately angered by this dismissive and extremely antagonistic response of Harvard?
My goal is to help Harvard out of this mess, but I have been stymied in doing so. Multiple Harvard affiliates have suggested that I reach out to the Harvard Corporation Board, and I have done so. I have received no response to my outreach to the members of the Board with whom I have had a (perhaps once) good relationship. A number of others have offered to connect me with President Alan Garber or have told me that he would be reaching out to me shortly, but no such outreach has occurred; hence, I am herewith sharing my advice to Harvard.
So what should Harvard do?
While much has been made of the Administration’s April 11th letter to Harvard which was clearly overreaching in certain respects, I am relying here on the April 3, 2025 letter from the Administration rather than the April 11th letter, as the Administration has explained that the April 11th letter was sent in error. (See: https://nytimes.com/2025/04/18/business/trump-harvard-letter-mistake.html)
The April 3rd letter https://documentcloud.org/documents/25879226-april-3-harvard-preconditions-letter/ makes nine reasonable and straightforward requests:
“1. Oversight and accountability for biased programs that fuel antisemitism. Programs and departments that fuel antisemitic harassment must be reviewed and necessary changes made to address bias, improve viewpoint diversity, and end ideological capture.
2. Disciplinary reform and consistent accountability. Harvard has an obligation to consistently and proactively enforce its existing disciplinary policies, ensuring that senior administrative leaders are responsible for final decisions. Reforms must include a comprehensive mask ban (with medical and religious exemptions, given identification is always displayed) and a clarified time, place, and manner policy. Harvard must review and report on disciplinary actions for antisemitic rule violations since October 7, 2023.
3. Student group accountability. Recognized and unrecognized student groups, and their leadership, must be held accountable for violations of Harvard policy.
4. Governance and leadership reforms. Harvard must make meaningful governance reforms to improve its organizational structure to foster clear lines of authority and accountability, and to empower faculty and administrative leaders who are committed to implementing the changes indicated in this letter.
5. Merit-based admissions reform. Harvard must adopt and implement merit-based admissions policies; cease all preferences based on race, color, or national origin in admissions throughout its undergraduate, graduate, and other programs; and demonstrate through structural and personnel action that these changes are durable.
6. Merit-based hiring reform. Harvard must adopt and implement merit-based hiring policies; cease all preferences based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in hiring throughout its teaching and research faculty, staff, and leadership; and demonstrate through structural and personnel action that these changes are durable.
7. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs. DEI programs teach students, faculty, staff, and leadership to make snap judgments about each other based on crude race and identity stereotypes, which fuels division and hatred based on race, color, national origin, and other protected identity characteristics. All efforts should be made to shutter such programs.
8. Cooperation with law enforcement. Harvard must cooperate with law enforcement to ensure student safety.
9. Transparency and reporting to ED, DHS, and other federal regulators. Harvard must comply fully with existing statutory reporting requirements under Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, commit to full cooperation with DHS and other federal regulators, and make organizational changes as necessary to enable full compliance.”
None of the April 3rd requests are unreasonable. and all appear to be lawful. Furthermore, the nine requirements would likely be welcomed by the substantial majority of faculty, students, and alumni of the University....
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 21,851
- Reaction score
- 24,833
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 21,851
- Reaction score
- 24,833
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 11,867
- Reaction score
- 17,310
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 21,851
- Reaction score
- 24,833
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 15,600
- Reaction score
- 6,219
- Points
- 113
Preaching it!
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 6,001
- Reaction score
- 13,695
- Points
- 113
OK, everyone. Update your score cards. Priests and members of the church are now men of integrity and wisdom. Heed the words.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 15,600
- Reaction score
- 6,219
- Points
- 113
Linky Tariff down to 22, Komrade Flog.
When was the last time that 50% of those polled thought that the country was going in the right direction?
Granted, I don't think much of polls, but generally, this would seem a victory for the current administration, despite the whining from the takers in the country.
Granted, I don't think much of polls, but generally, this would seem a victory for the current administration, despite the whining from the takers in the country.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 21,851
- Reaction score
- 24,833
- Points
- 113