Speaker 1: It's Night Side with Dan Ray.
Speaker 2: I'm telling you Boston's new radio.
Speaker 3: Oh good luck to Brad Marsh and I'm not sure
Speaker 3: he's going to be able to play six years, but hey,
Speaker 3: for a thirty seven year old guy in the NHL,
Speaker 3: that's pretty good. Pretty good. Okay. We have spent two
Speaker 3: hours talking about the controversy in Newton. If you tuned
Speaker 3: in late, we talked with a city councilor John Oliver.
Speaker 3: In the nine o'clock hour, we talked with Arianna h Foya,
Speaker 3: one of the residents of No Nantum, and we also
Speaker 3: talked with Newton Mayor Ruthanne Fuller. They were in the
Speaker 3: nine o'clock hour, and in the eleven o'clock hour. We
Speaker 3: had lots of different callers, most of whom are very
Speaker 3: much offended by which may by what Mayor Fuller did.
Speaker 3: If you had an opportunity to miss the nine o'clock hour,
Speaker 3: you can listen to it tomorrow. Tomorrow that hour will
Speaker 3: be posted by Rob Brooks, or top notch ace producer.
Speaker 3: He gets that up sometime generally before two or three
Speaker 3: o'clock in the morning, and Rob will have that posted
Speaker 3: for all of you to listen to and you can
Speaker 3: begin listening to it as early as probably four o'clock
Speaker 3: this morning. Now I want to switch on to a
Speaker 3: national story as I think, as I'm sure all of
Speaker 3: you are aware, the President's big beautiful tax bill or
Speaker 3: whatever you want, like a big beautiful bill. I don't
Speaker 3: think he calls it a tax bill. We probably will
Speaker 3: be getting more to that in the next day or so.
Speaker 3: I'm here for two more days this week. But one
Speaker 3: of the things that is a big story today is
Speaker 3: the Trump administration formally has found that Harvard failed to
Speaker 3: protect Jewish students and has threatening to cut off all funding.
Speaker 3: I'm looking at stories today from CNN, from The New
Speaker 3: York Times, from Associated Press, and I think this is
Speaker 3: a very interesting story. Obviously, Donald Trump has Harvard in
Speaker 3: the crosshairs. He has two schools in the crossairs, Columbia
Speaker 3: and Harvard. Now I don't think either of those schools
Speaker 3: covered themselves in glory in the wake of the Hamas
Speaker 3: attack on Israel back in October of twenty twenty three
Speaker 3: and all of the demonstrations that have occurred. But for
Speaker 3: some reason, maybe it is because Colombia has been more
Speaker 3: acquiescent Harvard, it seems to be the real focus of
Speaker 3: President Trump, and I think that there is a possibility
Speaker 3: that the President could easily overplay his hand. I, as
Speaker 3: I think most of you realize, I support Israel and
Speaker 3: Israel's right to exist. I think the president should be
Speaker 3: congratulated on what he achieved in the damage that he
Speaker 3: inflicted on the nuclear program in Iran. We were talking
Speaker 3: about that a week ago, I said at that time,
Speaker 3: and I continue to believe it. Watch what Iran does.
Speaker 3: Don't necessarily listen to what they say. They are always
Speaker 3: going to say things for domestic consumption, the purpose of
Speaker 3: which is to remain in power. This is a autocracy,
Speaker 3: this is a theocracy. It is a dictatorship. It oppresses
Speaker 3: its people. We know all of that. On that score,
Speaker 3: I think the President did exactly the right thing. However,
Speaker 3: in terms of Harvard, Harvard has acknowledged that they have
Speaker 3: not been as diligent as they should be in being
Speaker 3: concerned about how Jewish students are treated, not only by
Speaker 3: faculty but also by other students. They have said Harvard report,
Speaker 3: they did their own task force, and Harvard said the
Speaker 3: alienating and hostile atmosphere that many Jewish and Israeli students
Speaker 3: had Harvard described experiencing, particularly in the twenty twenty three
Speaker 3: twenty four academic year. They acknowledged that. Okay, now you
Speaker 3: have the Trump administration with their own task force. They
Speaker 3: have found that Harvard University is in violent violation. I
Speaker 3: don't know what that word means, violent violation, but violent
Speaker 3: violation of the Civil Rights Act. That's according to CNN,
Speaker 3: once more escalating the battle with the school, days after
Speaker 3: President Trump suggests that a deal was in sight to
Speaker 3: end its targeting of the university. Now, the members of
Speaker 3: the Joint Task Force to Combat Anti Semitism said on
Speaker 3: today in a letter to Harvard President Alan Garber, that
Speaker 3: an investigation into the school's compliance with Title six of
Speaker 3: the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color,
Speaker 3: or national origin in programs or activity receiving federal funding,
Speaker 3: is now complete. The Office for Civil Rights at the
Speaker 3: Department of Health and Human Services finds that Harvard University
Speaker 3: is in violent violation of the Title six of the
Speaker 3: Civil Rights Act, reads the letter obtained by CNN, which
Speaker 3: is signed by Assistant Attorney General Ramid Dillon and others.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 3: Dylan is a lawyer. She's out of San Francisco, she
Speaker 3: seems to me to be a very competent attorney, but
Speaker 3: she also is very much a Trump advocate appointed by
Speaker 3: the president. According to CNN, the investigation concluded that Harvard
Speaker 3: has been in some cases deliberately indifferent and in others
Speaker 3: has been a wilful participant in anti Semitic harassment of
Speaker 3: Jewish students, faculty in staff, pointing two examples of Jewish
Speaker 3: and israel students being assaulted and spin on imagery on
Speaker 3: campus that it says, quote trafficked in obvious anti Semitic troops,
Speaker 3: and what it describes as an impermissible multi week encampment
Speaker 3: that has stilled fear in and disrupted the studies of
Speaker 3: Jewish and Israeli students, according to the letter, now there
Speaker 3: is a quote here. In response, Harvard said it is
Speaker 3: far from indifferent and strongly disagrees with the report's conclusion.
Speaker 3: The university's communications director, Jason Newton said in a statement
Speaker 3: his statement, anti Semitism is a serious problem, and no
Speaker 3: matter the content, it is unacceptable. Harvard has taken substantive,
Speaker 3: proactive steps to address the root causes of anti Semitism
Speaker 3: in its community. Newton said one to folk On that
Speaker 3: because that is an acknowledgment by the Harvard spokesman. And
Speaker 3: I'm sure that this statement from the Harvard spokesman or
Speaker 3: communications director Jason Newton was reviewed by the administration and
Speaker 3: reviewed by lawyers. It is an admission against interest. It
Speaker 3: is a statement that says, yeah, anti Semitism is a
Speaker 3: serious problem, and no matter the content is unacceptable. Fine.
Speaker 3: That is a statement that does not refer to Harvard University,
Speaker 3: but the sentence following that does. Harvard has taken substantial, substantive,
Speaker 3: proactive steps to address the root causes of anti semitism
Speaker 3: in its meaning Harvard's community. So that is an admission
Speaker 3: in of itself. And look, there's no question at this
Speaker 3: point that Harvard has been lax in tamping down and
Speaker 3: dealing with anti semitism. The question is, if it is
Speaker 3: acknowledging the problem and has taken steps to alleviate that problem,
Speaker 3: why is the Trump administration still going after them and
Speaker 3: increasing the threats and raising the stakes. I don't know
Speaker 3: the answer to that, but I hope you do. I
Speaker 3: think it would be great if we could eliminate all
Speaker 3: forms of discrimination in every higher education university in this country.
Speaker 3: But I think the Trump administration would be wise, in
Speaker 3: my opinion, to take its victories and monitor Harvard's future compliance.
Speaker 3: But to take the acknowledgement that Harvard has made. It
Speaker 3: is not saying we're as clean as the driven snow.
Speaker 3: They are admitting that they have failed. Six one, seven, two, five, four, ten,
Speaker 3: thirty six one seven, nine, three, one ten thirty Different topic,
Speaker 3: different subject, different hour. Let's light them up, coming right
Speaker 3: back on Nightside. You're on night Side with Dan Ray
Speaker 3: on WBZ Boston's news radio. Sorry, will take them in
Speaker 3: order as we always do. Let me go to Matt
Speaker 3: and Brighton. Matt, are you satisfied with what Harvard has
Speaker 3: said or done or do you think the Trump administration
Speaker 3: should continue to push and do they risk being becoming
Speaker 3: considered overbearing in this situation?
Speaker 4: Well, I mean it's a good question. I think we're
Speaker 4: getting two perspectives here. Now I understand the part of
Speaker 4: anti Semitism versus anti Zionism, and when I read Harvard's statement,
Speaker 4: they've said we felt like we've combated anti Israel, which
Speaker 4: would be anti Zionism. The overall answer is that's for
Speaker 4: the students who are there to answer and President Trump,
Speaker 4: who's a very good advocate for the Jewish people. I'm
Speaker 4: talking about the American Jews. Yep, they may be still targeted.
Speaker 4: I don't know that they're not. And if Harvard's can
Speaker 4: able to put in place anti Israel rhetoric, anti Zionism
Speaker 4: and control that, I don't know there's not still anti Semitism.
Speaker 4: So I'm there will be a point that I think, yes,
Speaker 4: they are overbearing and overdoing it. But until I'm able
Speaker 4: to be satisfying within my peer group, know that both
Speaker 4: are combated. I support Donald Trump and President Trump can.
Speaker 3: Well you're a young guy. You're a young guy. You're
Speaker 3: not at Harvard, but you're a young guy.
Speaker 4: Right, No, but I might to law school.
Speaker 3: No, but what if your how I'm trying to figure
Speaker 3: how old are you? Thirty five?
Speaker 4: A couple of years younger?
Speaker 3: Okay, we're saying you're thirty three. Okay. And the point
Speaker 3: that I'm trying to make is Harvard seems to be
Speaker 3: willing to cooperate in this effort and to make things better.
Speaker 3: If Trump sometimes, if he senses a weakness, he probably
Speaker 3: tries to take advantage of that. But they can come
Speaker 3: a point in time where he overplaces his hand and
Speaker 3: I I and then Harvard can dig their heels. And
Speaker 3: I would rather see him, uh work with Harvard.
Speaker 1: I would like to see that too.
Speaker 4: But imagine if we tried to work with columb I
Speaker 4: mean we imagine if he tried to work with Kolombie.
Speaker 4: I mean, look like the old deans Stephonic or whatever
Speaker 4: her name was, not Staphonic.
Speaker 3: Congress Stephanic who was who ran the the hearing in
Speaker 3: which the presidents of Harvard, U, Penn m T were
Speaker 3: questions and the Columbi.
Speaker 5: You two, I go over a year ago.
Speaker 4: It just seems I agree with you. It would be
Speaker 4: great to work in you know, roundtable legislation to combat
Speaker 4: this and get rid of it and to make and
Speaker 4: to figure out.
Speaker 3: The resignation of the University of Virginia president yesterday.
Speaker 4: Uh, I hadn't heard about it, to be honest with you.
Speaker 3: The University of Virginia, which is also one of the
Speaker 3: really best universities in the country, resigned. So well, we'll see,
Speaker 3: We'll love to see the next Matt is always appreciate you.
Speaker 1: My friend, appreciate it.
Speaker 4: Then, thank you much.
Speaker 3: Good night. Let me go to my friend Harvey silver Glad,
Speaker 3: who was checking in on his Harvey, I know you
Speaker 3: are very close to this situation. What has Harvard done
Speaker 3: substantively that they're referring to?
Speaker 1: It is refused to bow down and kiss the knee
Speaker 1: of Donald Trump. That is the only reason that Trump
Speaker 1: is going after Harvard.
Speaker 3: But tell me if you know, first of all, what
Speaker 3: has Harvard done. Because I'm being critical of Trump here
Speaker 3: or potentially overplaying his hand. It seems to me as
Speaker 3: if I just read that statement, you're a lawyer, better
Speaker 3: a lawyer than me or I could ever think of being.
Speaker 3: But I thought that that statement from the Harvard spokesman
Speaker 3: was interesting. Anti Semitism is a serious problem, no matter
Speaker 3: the content.
Speaker 1: Period is very frank, had been very frank. By the way,
Speaker 1: Harvard has a Jewish president. I don't know if that matters,
Speaker 1: but it might be factored in to the equation here.
Speaker 1: Harvard has been very frank. It has this problem, it's
Speaker 1: working on it.
Speaker 3: By the way, I just want to read this sentence, Harvey,
Speaker 3: because I think this supports what you're saying. Harvard has
Speaker 3: taken substantive, proactive steps to address the to address the
Speaker 3: root causes of anti semitism. In its meaning Harvard's community.
Speaker 3: This was the statement from the from the communications director.
Speaker 3: I believe that that is an admission statement, you know,
Speaker 3: as a statement against interest. It's an acknowledgment that Harvard's saying,
Speaker 3: we've dropped the ball and we're going to make it better.
Speaker 1: Correct.
Speaker 3: Why not take that as a victory? Trump? Does he
Speaker 3: run the risk of overplaying his hand? My question?
Speaker 1: Cos he does? He does, and the Harvard's going to
Speaker 1: win in court now if they take it to the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court, I'm not so sure, because Trump now controls
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court is going to somebody's going to win.
Speaker 3: So you're saying Harvard will win on the withholding of
Speaker 3: federal moneys. Is that what you're saying. Yes, it's a
Speaker 3: long fight and they are going to be without federal moneies.
Speaker 3: It just seems as if Harvard is in Trump's cross heirs,
Speaker 3: and no matter what Harvard is willing to acknowledge and
Speaker 3: admit to, that's not going to be enough.
Speaker 1: What do you think he wants? What do you think
Speaker 1: it is going to be painful the remainder of the
Speaker 1: Trump I've written to Alan Garber and John Manning about this.
Speaker 1: It is going to be painful. For four years. But
Speaker 1: Harvard has been around since sixteen thirty six.
Speaker 3: That's great.
Speaker 1: It's going to be around for a few hundred more
Speaker 1: years at least, and Trump is going to be around
Speaker 1: only four years. It's going to cost it's going to
Speaker 1: cost them a lot of money, but it's going to
Speaker 1: be worth it in the longer. They have about a
Speaker 1: seventy six billion dollar endowment. They have to dig into
Speaker 1: it and just write out these these three and a
Speaker 1: half crazy years at in front of us.
Speaker 3: Okay, so let us assume they're doing that. Okay, let's
Speaker 3: take that. What substantively do you think Harvard can do.
Speaker 3: Maybe there's nothing they can do to please Trump, but
Speaker 3: what can they do to make it more comfortable for
Speaker 3: Jewish and Israeli students on that campus?
Speaker 1: Okay? You know that I'm a free speech absolutist.
Speaker 3: I know that, tru I'm very much aware of that,
Speaker 3: and that's why I'm asking the question.
Speaker 1: Students have a right dispute hatred. They have a right
Speaker 1: to protest Israel, to protest Judaism, to protest Jews. They
Speaker 1: have a right to march. They do not have a
Speaker 1: right to interfere with other students getting their education. They
Speaker 1: do not have a right to interfere with the classes,
Speaker 1: with students' ability to attend classes, with student's ability to study.
Speaker 1: They can demonstrate, but they can't demonstrate so loudly that
Speaker 1: they interrupt the business of Harvard University. Correct the traditional
Speaker 1: free speech lines have to be drawn here.
Speaker 3: Would it be helpful? And why has it not happened
Speaker 3: that Jewish organizations, and there are Jewish organizations at Harvard
Speaker 3: if they held a news conference and said, look, our
Speaker 3: life here is better, better today than it was a
Speaker 3: year ago, and we hope it will be better a
Speaker 3: year from now than it is today. But the university
Speaker 3: is moving in the right direction, and we commend the
Speaker 3: administration for going in that direction. And we appreciate what
Speaker 3: President Trump has done highlighting this problem. But there comes
Speaker 3: a point in time where it maybe Harvard has to
Speaker 3: self regulate and not face penalties, financial penalties from the government.
Speaker 3: Why have the Jewish student organization has not come forward
Speaker 3: with something like that, Harvey.
Speaker 1: I don't know that, but I'm going to write a
Speaker 1: letter to them and suggest it.
Speaker 3: Well, thank you, thank you. You can tell them we
Speaker 3: talked about it here on Night Side. Roy Pell as
Speaker 3: always I appreciate your perspective. I think we both are
Speaker 3: looking for the same goal. And I know that you've
Speaker 3: negotiated with Trump yourself in your in your time as
Speaker 3: as an attorney and found him to be very off putting,
Speaker 3: and so you've seen this behavior before. I think sometimes
Speaker 3: when the other side is acquiescingcept accept the the concession
Speaker 3: claim victory. I don't think Donald Trump or the administration
Speaker 3: needs to be appointing professorships at Harvard. I think that's
Speaker 3: an absolute overreach and it will come back to haunt
Speaker 3: the Republicans. Yes, thank you, Harvey. Right, Oh, talk soon,
Speaker 3: Talk soon.
Speaker 1: Good.
Speaker 3: The only lines that we have opened right now are
Speaker 3: the only line six one seven nine. I'd love to
Speaker 3: hear from you on this. We're going to talk with
Speaker 3: Laurie Bob in California, John and Pennsylvania, Lauri's and Melrose.
Speaker 3: We got to so the six one, seven, two, five, four,
Speaker 3: ten thirty lines are full six seven, nine, three, ten thirty.
Speaker 3: I think that you have to commend Donald Trump for
Speaker 3: pointing out this issue. Harvard is not denying this, Harvard
Speaker 3: is agreeing to it and saying they are working on
Speaker 3: it and they would like to continue to work on it.
Speaker 3: I think there there is a point in time where
Speaker 3: the president needs to say, we will monitor, we appreciate
Speaker 3: what you have done. Let it. Let Harvard present a
Speaker 3: president a report. I don't get it. I don't get it.
Speaker 3: It's a serious issue, but I'd love to get your
Speaker 3: take on it. And if I'm wrong, bring it on. Okay,
Speaker 3: I'm willing to hear your point of view. We'll be
Speaker 3: back on night Side after this.
Speaker 2: It's Night Side with Dan Ray, Boston News Radio.
Speaker 3: All right, let's get to the calls right away. Let's
Speaker 3: go to Laurie and Melrose. Hey, Laurie, welcome next on Nightside.
Speaker 6: Yes, Hi, Yes, I agree with you. I think it's
Speaker 6: uh an ego issue because he made so many demands
Speaker 6: months and whatever ago, and they weren't, you know, jumping
Speaker 6: and to please him Trump. I think it's in all
Speaker 6: an ego thing. He doesn't want anybody to go against him.
Speaker 6: Everybody has to you know, He's even he's going after
Speaker 6: his own members if they don't jump to vote for
Speaker 6: what he wants. I think that's the issue, and it
Speaker 6: goes back. I think to win the demonstrations months after
Speaker 6: the cause of war was going on and they were
Speaker 6: over you really, bombing and killing you know, citizens there
Speaker 6: with you know, trying to get to the you know,
Speaker 6: v Millins and all that was going on, and the
Speaker 6: college students were demonstrating, and I think, you know, things
Speaker 6: got heated and overdone, and bringing the Jewish students for
Speaker 6: all this, some of them probably from that part of
Speaker 6: the world, the ones that were demonstrating, and if people
Speaker 6: were upset, and I mean, going with his comment about
Speaker 6: the you know, student organizations or yours, you know, speaking up,
Speaker 6: the Jewish studentization speaking up, I'm bothered by the I
Speaker 6: have Jewish friends, and I'm bothered by the fact that
Speaker 6: they haven't addressed the issue of the starvation in Gaza.
Speaker 6: Of all the children are dying and the people are
Speaker 6: starving to death. Why aren't they speaking up to their
Speaker 6: you know, well, let me.
Speaker 3: Ask you this question. Did Americans speak up when Germany
Speaker 3: was being bombed in nineteen forty four?
Speaker 6: Probably?
Speaker 1: Probably not.
Speaker 6: I wasn't around and well.
Speaker 3: I wasn't around here. Who was the first president of
Speaker 3: the United States, Georgia Washington. I wasn't around that either,
Speaker 3: But I know who that was.
Speaker 6: I mean, I don't know what happened at that time.
Speaker 3: But what I'm saying is the assault by Hamas on
Speaker 3: elderly civilians and on babies was brutal, brutal. Now you
Speaker 3: you pick on somebody and then Israel responds and they
Speaker 3: want to root out Hamas from Gaza. And Hamas has
Speaker 3: infiltrated itself into uh into the Palestinian society and they
Speaker 3: built built tunnels under hospitals and under schools. So if
Speaker 3: you're Benjamin Naton Yaho, do you say, well, right.
Speaker 6: Now I'm talking a long, long, long time of bombing.
Speaker 6: We're not talking at you know, going after them and
Speaker 6: so forth. There haven't been a lot of consideration if
Speaker 6: these people were stopping, you know, a while ago, and
Speaker 6: they finally let some food in, and now it's back
Speaker 6: to the point that there's not even medication.
Speaker 3: When when when the humanitarian groups have have put habitation
Speaker 3: to get in.
Speaker 6: If you watch I watch patients, you know, face the
Speaker 6: nation every week. I listened to that and you have
Speaker 6: Republicans for Democrats and all sides speaking.
Speaker 3: And but who do who do think who do you
Speaker 3: think is ripping off the food and the medical supplies
Speaker 3: that are coming in.
Speaker 6: Do you think that the world health organizations are all
Speaker 6: trying you win everybody, and they haven't been allowed in
Speaker 6: by Israel.
Speaker 3: I mean question of Israel. It's Hamas no how wrong
Speaker 3: on that, Laurie. I must tell you when the when
Speaker 3: the food gets in, Harmas has helped, has grabbed the
Speaker 3: food and the medicine. They're more concerned about their fighters than.
Speaker 7: They are about the.
Speaker 6: Mowing down the people that are again.
Speaker 3: You and I and you let me tell you, you
Speaker 3: and I.
Speaker 8: I know it's no.
Speaker 6: You don't want to accept that any of that. So
Speaker 6: I understand you.
Speaker 3: I run a talk show in which people have like
Speaker 3: you have a right to call and express yourselves. But
Speaker 3: when you say things that I know are untrue and
Speaker 3: are unfair to what Israel is trying to do, let
Speaker 3: me ask you. I ask you a question. Could let
Speaker 3: me see if if we can find a point of agreement.
Speaker 3: Are you pleased with the UH the attack of the
Speaker 3: US on the Iranian nuclear sites or not?
Speaker 6: I am am, but I don't know if the timing
Speaker 6: is the right time. It was a little bit you know,
Speaker 6: working more and time given to the you know, diplomatic part.
Speaker 6: But I'm not against it. I think was thought of
Speaker 6: fifteen years ago as an idea, and it was reasons
Speaker 6: for it. But I don't think we're finished.
Speaker 3: I think this is just you know, you do you
Speaker 3: think do you think Iran should have the right to
Speaker 3: develop nuclear weapons?
Speaker 1: Oh?
Speaker 6: I don't have the right, but I'm saying that they know.
Speaker 3: If they don't have the right, how do how do
Speaker 3: we prevent them? Would it be a good thing if
Speaker 3: Iran had a nuclear weapon or nuclear weapons? In your mind?
Speaker 6: What does that have to do with what we're talking about.
Speaker 7: We're talking about every heart everything I brought up, the
Speaker 7: fact I'm trying to I'm trying to plumb your mind,
Speaker 7: Laurie and understand from where you from where you're coming.
Speaker 3: That's all I was hoping that you will want to say,
Speaker 3: Ron is probably the one of the last countries in
Speaker 3: the world that should have nuclear weapons.
Speaker 7: They are a crazed I didn't you twisting my words.
Speaker 7: Everything I was hoping.
Speaker 3: I was hoping that.
Speaker 6: I was hop they had You know, they were picking
Speaker 6: a time that Israel was bombing them, and they were
Speaker 6: back and forth bombing, so this was a good time
Speaker 6: for us should just jump in and destroy that mountain.
Speaker 6: But that was the reason it was done.
Speaker 3: You were you were unwilling to answer my direct questions.
Speaker 3: But that's okay. I'm glad you called. You're always welcome
Speaker 3: to call this program.
Speaker 6: And we had I'm just telling you that it all started.
Speaker 6: You were asking the question. It all started with the
Speaker 6: student demonstrations. They were they were upset.
Speaker 3: Oh, they were more than they were more than upset.
Speaker 3: They spit on Israeli, on Israeli students, They bit on
Speaker 3: Jewish students. However upset they were. They prevented Israelian Jewish
Speaker 3: students from going to class. Harvey Silverglay, who's the first
Speaker 3: Amendment absolutist, just talked about that. Laurie. I've gone on
Speaker 3: way too long, but I've enjoyed the conversation, and I
Speaker 3: hope you can.
Speaker 6: Give you okay if you have your own opinion.
Speaker 3: Okay, we both have our own opinions. That's what that's
Speaker 3: what this show is all about. Thanks, lur Okay, where
Speaker 3: I'm going to go next, I'm going to go to John. John,
Speaker 3: I'm going to get you in here, but I'm going
Speaker 3: to kind of crunch a little bit on time.
Speaker 5: Go ahead, John, Sure, Well, first of all, let's address
Speaker 5: the question of what violent means in violent violation quote unquote,
Speaker 5: it means nothing. It's it's simply more adaptation of the
Speaker 5: official government channels of Trump's own, typically hyperbolic to the
Speaker 5: point of being untevin from reality rhetoric. So we know
Speaker 5: that the violent phrase there, it means nothing. It's a
Speaker 5: meaningless adjective. He's doing it for the for the reason
Speaker 5: that your friend mister uh Silverglade Esquire uh stated that
Speaker 5: he was he uh, he's a want to be authoritarian,
Speaker 5: and he's back by a party that's willing to go
Speaker 5: along with him at this point, and so he wants
Speaker 5: Harvard to count out to him. That's all he demands capitulation.
Speaker 3: Okay, well, how well Harvard has said this, John, let
Speaker 3: me just read this sentence to you, because I'd like
Speaker 3: to get your reactions.
Speaker 5: I heard, I heard it, I know. But there may
Speaker 5: be people who are listening now who haven't heard of anyone.
Speaker 3: John, John, give me, give me, give me the the
Speaker 3: the kindness to restate. Harvard has admitted anti Semitism is
Speaker 3: a serious problem, no matter the context, it's unacceptable, and
Speaker 3: you and I would agree with that.
Speaker 1: Correct.
Speaker 5: Yes, absolutely, Harvard has.
Speaker 3: Been has taken substantive, proactive steps to address the root
Speaker 3: causes of anti Semitism in its community, meaning Harvard's community.
Speaker 3: That's an admission, that's an acknowledgment by Harvard that Harvard
Speaker 3: has a problem. But they also say we've taken substantive,
Speaker 3: proactive steps. My point is, and my question is, and
Speaker 3: you have answered it, which is fine. Why would Trump
Speaker 3: not be swat enough to say, Okay, you've made that admission.
Speaker 3: I addressed a problem that even you admitted to. Let's
Speaker 3: fix it, and we're going to monitor you. Why not
Speaker 3: leave it at that. That's what I'm suggesting.
Speaker 5: You might agree, he doesn't want, he doesn't want. He
Speaker 5: doesn't want that, he's not That's not the concern. The
Speaker 5: concern is exercising power and demanding capitulation.
Speaker 9: He wants to.
Speaker 5: Control, for example, their their law school curriculum. Look, I can,
Speaker 5: I can. I can read you off a list of
Speaker 5: Trump officials and one outside consultant, quote unquote Laura Lumer
Speaker 5: who or either have either identified themselves as pro righte
Speaker 5: nationalists or who have made racist statements, or who have
Speaker 5: associated with anti Summites, or who have associated with outright
Speaker 5: white nationalists. I can give you a short list of
Speaker 5: at half a dozen off the nearly off the top
Speaker 5: of my head. So don't tell me that the Trump
Speaker 5: administration is just adamantly against discrimination against any racial or
Speaker 5: religious or minority group and that that's why they're targeting Harvard. No,
Speaker 5: they want to exercise belay.
Speaker 3: They have targeted. They have targeted a university which has
Speaker 3: made admissions and acknowledgments. I'm you are so blind towards Trump, John,
Speaker 3: You're so blind in your nothing more, John, John, do
Speaker 3: me a favor. I gave you a chance to make
Speaker 3: your speech. Okay, I'm just telling you you are so
Speaker 3: blind in your hatred towards Trump, which in your mind
Speaker 3: is totally justified. Okay, totally justified that I'm simply trying
Speaker 3: to say, as someone who thinks Trump has done some
Speaker 3: good things as well as some dumb things, that I'm
Speaker 3: confused by this. You're you're giving me your example and
Speaker 3: and I'm giving you an opportunity to express it. That's
Speaker 3: all I'm asking. I'm glad you called, but again, no
Speaker 3: matter what Trump does you you're not going to accept it.
Speaker 3: I think that he is.
Speaker 5: Oh, my lord, Dan, I okay, if if the intelligence justified,
Speaker 5: and it very well may have, Iran was working towards
Speaker 5: a nuclear weapon at that point.
Speaker 3: There's no question then I'm working towards a nuclear What
Speaker 3: do you mean if if the intelligence is justified, of
Speaker 3: course they were working towards a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 5: His own director, his only direct his own director of intelligence,
Speaker 5: so that at that time she didn't believe they were,
Speaker 5: then you were canted. So let's say they were. Yes,
Speaker 5: there was probably no other options but to go ahead.
Speaker 3: Right, Okay, that's fine. So you're gonna give him credit
Speaker 3: for bombing around. You're giving him credit for bombing around, correct.
Speaker 5: Yes, justified that they were working on. Yeah. I gave
Speaker 5: him credit doing the first administration for for grounding those
Speaker 5: bowling planes where the software was for was junk and
Speaker 5: they were refusing to do it even though it put
Speaker 5: passengers and child.
Speaker 3: Did you give him credit for closing the border?
Speaker 5: I give him, well, I give him credit for border
Speaker 5: uh in going after some of the weak points that
Speaker 5: were allowing human traffickers. Now I don't give him credit
Speaker 5: for some of the tenous actions he's taken to violate
Speaker 5: basic human rights.
Speaker 3: That's that's the question. That question, do you does it
Speaker 3: violate human rights to close the border?
Speaker 5: It doesn't violate even to close the border.
Speaker 3: Okay, so we have another point of agreement. John. I
Speaker 3: got to run here, man, because we've gone a little
Speaker 3: longer and I'm way past my break. I took you,
Speaker 3: but I didn't want to. I didn't want to hold
Speaker 3: you up. I made an exception for you. You're always
Speaker 3: welcome on this program. You're one of my best callers,
Speaker 3: and I thank you for calling.
Speaker 5: All right, thank you a great night.
Speaker 3: We'll be back on Nightside right after this.
Speaker 1: It's night Side with Radio.
Speaker 3: Okay. We have three calls, and I got like five minutes,
Speaker 3: so everybody's going to get a minute and a half. Okay,
Speaker 3: let's go for it right now, Jack and Newton. Jack,
Speaker 3: I got three calls, You got a minute and a half.
Speaker 3: Go ahead, Jack, I'll try to be quiet. Go ahead.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 9: Yeah, it's Jack Porter. Well. I've been a consultant to
Speaker 9: the task force at Harvard, and I can tell the
Speaker 9: audience it's been an excellent job. They should read all
Speaker 9: the recommendations to students a little very faith on campus.
Speaker 9: They're going to introduce Holocaust studies and zion of course
Speaker 9: is on Zionism. Everything will be done, I hope they
Speaker 9: don't spend a lot of money on legal fees Harvard.
Speaker 9: And also on the other side, and let's get back
Speaker 9: to thanks. Are fine, that's an excellent task for us.
Speaker 3: And well, that's great. And I hope that some of
Speaker 3: the Jewish students and Jewish organizations might step forward. I
Speaker 3: think Donald Trump might feel, hey, he has to get
Speaker 3: as much of a concession. I'm trying to answer my
Speaker 3: own question.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 3: It might be that Trump feels he needs to get
Speaker 3: as much out of Harvard. But there comes a point
Speaker 3: where you can't get water out of a stone, you
Speaker 3: know what I'm saying, Jack, If Harvard feels it's gone,
Speaker 3: you know, the whole field, They've gone the hundred yards
Speaker 3: and there's nothing left to go, he might get to
Speaker 3: the point where he's overplaying his hand. That's all. That's
Speaker 3: all the question I was asking tonight.
Speaker 1: So he's kind of, you know, just move on. I
Speaker 1: don't know.
Speaker 9: You know, he's picking on Harvard because it's the biggest
Speaker 9: and you know it's the biggest target.
Speaker 1: Yep.
Speaker 3: I'm trying to set an example of it. You can
Speaker 3: win with Harvard. I think that's a good point as well, Jack,
Speaker 3: I want to get two more in so I'm going
Speaker 3: to let you go. I owe you more time next
Speaker 3: time you call.
Speaker 9: Fair enough, Okay, thank you.
Speaker 3: Jack, appreciate the bill in New York. Billy got to
Speaker 3: be quick for me here. I got you and Mary
Speaker 3: Ann from Hopkin to go ahead, Bil.
Speaker 2: Hey, Dan, thanks for taking my call. I just want
Speaker 2: to say that regarding the Harvard issue, I think I
Speaker 2: think Harvard was wrong by saying, no, we didn't do
Speaker 2: anything wrong, we didn't do anything wrong, and they played
Speaker 2: that and the Trump administration got bad publicity over it,
Speaker 2: and everybody hated Trump because they were doing everything against Harvard.
Speaker 2: And now Harvard's coming out and saying, hey, you know what,
Speaker 2: we we had a problem. Yeah, and we're trying to
Speaker 2: fix it and and great, but you know what we
Speaker 2: could have They could have done all of all of
Speaker 2: the regrets in the beginning and said yeah, we had
Speaker 2: a problem, and now now we get it.
Speaker 3: Thank you, sir. I appreciate you call. I really do
Speaker 3: call back earlier. We get more time, Mary Ann and
Speaker 3: Hopkins and Mary Inne. I got about thirty five to
Speaker 3: forty seconds for you, go right ahead.
Speaker 8: Okay. I was just going to say, I think has
Speaker 8: Donald Trump ever admitted to any wrongdoing like ever. So
Speaker 8: the idea that like he all of a sudden cares
Speaker 8: about a certain group being discriminated against, I think is
Speaker 8: just absolute BS. And I think he's the worst abomination
Speaker 8: of a president ever, and I'm sick about what he's doing.
Speaker 3: Okay, Well, you said it, and you said it succinctly,
Speaker 3: and I appreciate that. And call earlier some night and
Speaker 3: we can have a longer conversation. Thanks, Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Appreciate it.
Speaker 1: Thank you have a greatness.
Speaker 3: Is your first time calling.
Speaker 8: I've called once more during COVID it was like years ago.
Speaker 3: Welcome back more frequently, don't I may not be here
Speaker 3: five years from now. You never know. Okay, Thanks Mary,
Speaker 3: I appreciate it very much. All Right, I want to
Speaker 3: thank everyone to call it, including my friend John from Pennsylvania,
Speaker 3: Harvey Silverglate, et cetera. We're done for the night and
Speaker 3: we I'll be on Facebook Live with a night side
Speaker 3: postgame coming right up. I want to thank Rob, want
Speaker 3: to thank Marita, want to thank all the callers and
Speaker 3: all the listeners. All dogs, okats, all pets go to heaven.
Speaker 3: That's what my pal Charlie Ray is who passed fifteen
Speaker 3: years ago in February. That's where all your pets are
Speaker 3: who have passed. They loved you and you love them.
Speaker 3: I do believe you'll see them again. We'll see again
Speaker 3: tomorrow night on night side everyone. Thanks so much for listening,
Speaker 3: and have a great Tuesday. Stay cool.