Connect with us

Politics

Linda McMahon blasts Harvard in scathing letter telling elite university it will no longer get federal grants

Published

on

Linda McMahon blasts Harvard in scathing letter telling elite university it will no longer get federal grants

Secretary of Education Linda McMahon sent a scathing letter to Harvard University President Alan Garber on Monday, not only blasting the Massachusetts Ivy League school’s handling of antisemitism on campus but also advising school officials to refrain from applying for future federal grants because they will not “be provided.”

In her no-holds-barred letter, McMahon told Garber that the federal government has a “sacred responsibility” to be an important steward of American taxpayer funds, adding that the school has amassed a largely tax-free $53.2 billion endowment and receives billions of dollars in taxpayer funds each year.

“Receiving such taxpayer funds is a privilege, not a right,” she wrote. “Yet instead of using these funds to advance the education of its students, Harvard is engaging in a systemic pattern of violating federal law. Where do many of these ‘students’ come from, who are they, how do they get into Harvard, or even into our country – and why is there so much HATE? These are questions that must be answered, among many more, but the biggest question of all is, why will Harvard not give straightforward answers to the American public?”

She also said the university has “made a mockery” of the higher education system in the U.S., inviting foreign students to its campuses who engage in violent behavior and show contempt for the U.S.

TRUMP SAYS HE’LL REVOKE HARVARD’S TAX-EXEMPT STATUS

Advertisement

Department of Education Secretary Linda McMahon sent a scathing letter to Harvard University President Alan Garber advising him to not apply for federal grants because they will not be provided. (Getty Images)

McMahon slammed the school for adopting an “embarrassing” remedial math program for undergraduates, questioning why a school that’s so difficult to get admitted to has to teach low-level mathematics.

She called Harvard out for being embroiled in plagiarism scandals and lambasted the school for allowing Harvard University and the Harvard Law Review to engage in “ugly racism.”

McMahon blasted Harvard for hiring former Mayors Bill de Blasio of New York City and Lori Lightfoot of Chicago to teach “leadership” at its School of Public Health.

“This is like hiring the captain of the Titanic to teach navigation to future captains of the sea,” she said.

Advertisement

IVY LEAGUE SUICIDES, PRINCETON’S 8TH STUDENT DEATH IN 4 YEARS EXPOSE CRISIS AT ELITE SCHOOLS

“The above concerns are only a fraction of the long list of Harvard’s consistent violations of its own legal duties. Given these and other concerning allegations, this letter is to inform you that Harvard should no longer seek GRANTS from the federal government, since none will be provided,” McMahon later wrote. “Harvard will cease to be a publicly funded institution and can instead operate as a privately-funded institution, drawing on its colossal endowment, and raising money from its large base of wealthy alumni.

“You have an approximately $53 billion head start, much of which was made possible by the fact that you are living within the walls of, and benefiting from, the prosperity secured by the United States of America and its free-market system you teach your students to despise,” she added.

In closing, McMahon reminded Garber that the Trump administration had been willing to maintain federal funding to Harvard as long as the school complied with federal law to protect and promote student welfare and stop racial preferencing.

HARVARD PRESIDENT APOLOGIZES FOR FAILURE TO ADDRESS ANTISEMITISM, ISLAMOPHOBIA AFTER NEW REPORTS RELEASED

Advertisement
Alan Garber on NBC News

Harvard President Alan Garber (Screenshot/NBC)

“The proposed common-sense reforms – which the Administration remains committed to – include a return to merit-based admissions and hiring, an end to unlawful programs that promote crude identity stereotypes, disciplinary reform and consistent accountability, including for student groups, cooperation with Law Enforcement, and reporting compliance with the Department of Education, Department of Homeland Security, and other Federal Agencies,” McMahon said. “The Administration’s priorities have not changed, and today’s letter marks the end of new grants for the university.”

Harvard confirmed to Fox News Digital that it received a letter from the administration on Monday.

“Today, we received another letter from the administration doubling down on demands that would impose unprecedented and improper control over Harvard University and would have chilling implications for higher education,” a Harvard spokesperson said. “Today’s letter makes new threats to illegally withhold funding for lifesaving research and innovation in retaliation against Harvard for filing its lawsuit on April 21.

“Harvard will continue to comply with the law, promote and encourage respect for viewpoint diversity, and combat antisemitism in our community. Harvard will also continue to defend against illegal government overreach aimed at stifling research and innovation that make Americans safer and more secure,” the spokesperson continued.

TRUMP BRANDS HARVARD ‘ANTISEMITIC’ AND A ‘THREAT TO DEMOCRACY’ DURING FUNDING BATTLE

Advertisement
President Donald Trump with Linda McMahon in the Oval office

President Donald Trump holds an executive order relating to education in the Oval Office on April 23, 2025. (AP NEWSROOM)

McMahon’s letter comes just days after President Donald Trump declared that his administration was going to be taking away Harvard’s tax-exempt status.

Trump made the announcement after Fox News reported that his administration asked the Internal Revenue Service to revoke Harvard University’s tax-exempt status. The Ivy League school’s failure to address antisemitism on campus is grounds for losing its 501(c)(3) status, sources said at the time.

Trump argued in mid-April that Harvard had “lost its way” and didn’t deserve federal funding.

“Harvard has been hiring almost all woke, Radical Left, idiots and ‘birdbrains’ who are only capable of teaching FAILURE to students and so-called ‘future leaders,’” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Look just to the recent past at their plagiarizing President, who so greatly embarrassed Harvard before the United States Congress.”

Harvard has become a target of Trump’s broader crackdown on universities, much of which is in response to last year’s anti-Israel unrest that erupted on campuses across the country.

Advertisement

On April 11, the Trump administration sent a letter to Garber and Harvard Corporation Lead Member Penny Pritzker outlining the institution’s failures and a list of demands from the White House. In the letter, the administration accused Harvard of failing to uphold civil rights laws and to foster an “environment that produces intellectual creativity.”

The Trump administration threatened to pull federal funding if Harvard did not reform governance and leadership as well as its hiring and admissions practices by August 2025. The letter emphasized the need for Harvard to change its international admissions process to avoid admitting students who are “hostile” to American values or support terrorism or antisemitism. 

 

Harvard refused to comply with the demands, with Garber saying that “no government… should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.”

The Trump administration then froze $2.2 billion in funding to Harvard and is reportedly looking to slash another billion, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Advertisement

The university later filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration over its “unlawful” freezing of funds.

Fox News’ Greg Norman, Andrea Margolis, Alexis McAdams and Rachel Wolf contributed to this report.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Politics

A Bearded Pete Buttigieg Drops Into Iowa for a Pitch to Veterans

Published

on

A Bearded Pete Buttigieg Drops Into Iowa for a Pitch to Veterans

He has a new, carefully groomed beard. He bantered with bros for hours on an irreverent comedy podcast. And on Tuesday, he criticized the Trump administration through an appeal to patriotism in a state early on the presidential nominating calendar.

Pete Buttigieg is inching back into the Democrats’ spotlight this spring with a series of appearances that have prompted speculation about how one of the party’s most evidently ambitious politicians might spend the lead-up to 2028.

With Democrats still searching for a direction and a standard-bearer after November’s loss to President Trump, supporters of Mr. Buttigieg, a smooth-talking former mayor from Indiana who served as the transportation secretary in the Biden administration, hope he might take up that mantle.

Without ever uttering Mr. Trump’s name, Mr. Buttigieg, in front of a veteran-heavy crowd of more than 1,600 in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, assailed the president’s efforts to cut the Department of Veterans Affairs and his broader handling of the country. He implored attendees to exert “peaceful but energetic” pressure on their representatives to block cuts to federal agencies and tax breaks for the wealthy. And he expressed optimism that people would resist Mr. Trump and restore faith in democracy.

“There is a parade of horribles emanating from this White House,” said Mr. Buttigieg, 43. But, he added, “the American people bow to no king.”

Advertisement

Mr. Buttigieg’s town hall in Iowa, sponsored by VoteVets, a progressive veterans group, was his most notable involvement yet in the Democratic shadow primary race, with prominent governors and members of Congress competing for attention as they weigh 2028 presidential bids.

They have been busy: Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, the party’s 2024 vice-presidential nominee, held a town hall in Iowa in March and plans to attend state party conventions this month in California and South Carolina, which is expected to host an early primary. Gov. JB Pritzker of Illinois ramped up 2028 speculation with a fiery speech last month in New Hampshire, another state traditionally at the front of the primary calendar. Senator Ruben Gallego of Arizona held an event last week in Pennsylvania, a top battleground state.

And Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, who has been less obvious about 2028 signaling but is seen as a possible contender, has been traveling the country alongside Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont to rally supporters against the influence of big money in politics.

VoteVets is an ally of Mr. Buttigieg, a former Naval intelligence officer who deployed to Afghanistan, but the group is also close with other potential 2028 contenders with military experience, including Mr. Walz and Mr. Gallego.

Mr. Buttigieg, for his part, has shown particular interest in how Democrats can win back the overlapping mix of working-class voters, men and disenchanted Americans who gravitated to Mr. Trump’s vision of upending the establishment last November.

Advertisement

At the town hall in Iowa, he offered no hints as to his ultimate political aspirations, though he did remind attendees of his past success in the Hawkeye State.

During one previous trip, “I was sort of winning the Iowa caucus,” he said casually, scratching his head as though reluctant to brag. “Run again!” someone yelled from the crowd. Mr. Buttigieg just chuckled.

Whether Mr. Buttigieg can successfully reach beyond the highly engaged voters who tune into MSNBC and read traditional news — the people who would attend a midweek political event in a non-election year — could determine whether he stands out in what is expected to be a crowded primary field.

Mr. Buttigieg has been explicit about his goal of reaching the apolitical voters who have said they feel the Democratic Party has become too focused on elites. Fielding questions from attendees on Tuesday about how the party could regain voters’ trust, he suggested it needed to have “some tough conversations.”

Democrats, Mr. Buttigieg said, must devise more proactive policy plans, rather than just defining themselves in opposition to Mr. Trump. And the party needed to “connect everything we believe, everything we say, everything we do, to everyday life,” he said.

Advertisement

Mr. Buttigieg also acknowledged his party had done a poor job last year by insisting that the economy was doing well by traditional metrics even as voters were consistently expressing financial frustration, comparing it to minimizing the angst of an angry spouse. “How does that go over?” he asked.

Speaking with reporters after the event, Mr. Buttigieg was less definitive about whether Democrats had erred in supporting President Joseph R. Biden Jr. in the re-election bid that he ultimately abandoned over concerns about his age.

Asked whether he had seen Mr. Biden experience cognitive decline last year — something Mr. Biden has pushed back against in recent interviews — Mr. Buttigieg did not answer directly. He did say that when he and Mr. Biden dealt with a bridge collapse in Baltimore last spring, “the same president that the world saw addressing that was the president that I was in the Oval with.”

Would the party have been better off if Mr. Biden had not run for re-election?

“Maybe,” Mr. Buttigieg allowed. “Right now, with the benefit of hindsight, I think most people would agree that that’s the case.”

Advertisement

Zach Wahls, a Democratic state senator in Iowa who is considering a run for U.S. Senate, said Mr. Buttigieg was “trying to meet voters where they are, and I think that is one of the most important things for the Democratic Party to do going forward.”

“His ability to communicate in an authentic, in-depth way is what really gets through to people who may not otherwise be superpolitical or who are frustrated with both parties,” Mr. Wahls added.

That was a sentiment echoed by attendees on Tuesday, who said they appreciated Mr. Buttigieg’s straightforward way of speaking.

“He doesn’t talk that political speech,” said Chris Bzdill, 55, of Cedar Rapids. “He understands that not everybody may agree with his view, but he’s going to give people an idea of where he stands. He’s not going to sit on the fence.”

The Iowa Republican Party had a different perspective on Mr. Buttigieg’s event. In a statement, it said Mr. Trump was improving access to health care for veterans while cutting wasteful spending at the Department of Veterans Affairs, and offered a contrasting take on Democrats from local veterans themselves.

Advertisement

“Mayor Buttigieg and Democrats want to rewrite history, but veterans across Iowa know the truth: President Trump put them first,” Wayne Kreutner, an Air Force veteran in the Cedar Rapids area, said in the statement. “Joe Biden and the Democrats put politics first.”

Mr. Buttigieg first burst onto the national scene in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary as the little-known mayor of South Bend, Ind., population 100,000. He quickly gained acclaim for his sharp debate lines and cogent communication skills, but ultimately faded as Mr. Biden consolidated his support.

Lately, Mr. Buttigieg has been more visible, addressing college students at the University of California, Santa Barbara; getting laughs with Stephen Colbert on his late-night show; and appearing on the “Flagrant” comedy podcast, which bills itself as delivering “unruly hot takes” and opposing political correctness.

Mr. Buttigieg, who now lives in Michigan with his husband and two children, was considered a contender for the open Senate and governor races there, but he bowed out of both contests in March, fueling more speculation about a presidential run.

Mr. Wahls, a friend of Mr. Buttigieg’s who attended the town hall, said before the event that he was eager to see Mr. Buttigieg’s new beard in person. “Beard looks good!” he wrote in a text.

Advertisement

But did he think it could be some sort of careful political calculation, planned to better appeal to the everyman voter? “I don’t know,” Mr. Wahls replied. “Every man’s relationship with his facial hair is a little different; I won’t speculate.”

Continue Reading

Politics

House Republicans face down Dem attacks, protests to pull all-nighter on Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'

Published

on

House Republicans face down Dem attacks, protests to pull all-nighter on Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'

Three key committees in the process of putting together President Donald Trump’s “one big, beautiful bill” are expected to work through the night to advance their respective portions of the Republican agenda.

The House Agriculture Committee, the Energy & Commerce Committee and the Ways & Means Committee are all holding meetings aimed at advancing key parts of Trump’s bill.

Sources told Fox News Digital they expected the Energy & Commerce and Ways & Means meetings, which began on Tuesday afternoon, to last upwards of 20 hours each. The Agriculture panel’s markup is also expected to last into Wednesday.

Democrats on each committee, meanwhile, have prepared a barrage of attacks and accusations against GOP lawmakers looking to gut critical welfare programs.

ANTI-ABORTION PROVIDER MEASURE IN TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ COULD SPARK HOUSE GOP REBELLION

Advertisement

President Donald Trump is pushing House Republicans to get his budget bill over the line. (Getty Images)

Sparks flew early at the Energy & Commerce Committee meeting with protesters both inside and outside the room repeatedly attempting to disrupt proceedings – with 26 people arrested by Capitol Police.

Protesters against Medicaid cuts, predominately in wheelchairs, remained outside the budget markup for several hours as representatives inside debated that and other critical facets under the committee’s broad jurisdiction.

Inside the budget markup, Democrats and Republicans sparred along party lines over Medicaid cuts. Democrats repeatedly claimed the Republican budget proposal will cut vital Medicaid services. 

Many Democrats shared how Medicaid services have saved their constituents’ lives and argued that millions of Americans could lose coverage under the current proposal.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Republicans accused Democrats of lying to the American people about Medicaid cuts – a word Kentucky Republican Rep. Brett Guthrie, Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, deterred his colleagues from using. Tensions arose when the word was repeated as Democrats called it a mischaracterization of their testimonies.

Republicans have contended that their bill only seeks to cut waste, fraud, and abuse of the Medicaid system, leaving more of its resources for vulnerable populations that truly need it. 

That committee was tasked with finding $880 billion in spending cuts to offset Trump’s other funding priorities. Guthrie told House Republicans on a call Sunday night that they’d found upwards of $900 billion in cuts.

Democrats have seized on Republican reforms to Medicaid, including heightened work requirements and shifting more costs to certain states, as a political cudgel. 

At one point late in the evening, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., made an appearance at the Energy & Commerce panel’s meeting.

Advertisement
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries speaking

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries showed up to the Energy & Commerce Committee hearing. (Tierney L. Cross/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

“I just want to mention our Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries is here because of his concern about Medicaid. Thank you,” the committee’s top Democrat, Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., said.

But tensions remain between moderate Republicans and conservatives about the level of cuts the committee is seeking to the former Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act green energy tax subsidies.

The meeting at the Ways & Means Committee, the House’s tax-writing panel, had relatively little fanfare but was equally contentious as Democrats attempted to offer amendments to preserve Affordable Care Act tax credits and changes to the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap.

At one point, Reps. Beth Van Duyne, R-Texas, and Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y., got into a heated exchange over SALT, with Suozzi pushing Van Duyne on whether she’d ever been to New York.

Van Duyne earlier called Texas a “donor state” in terms of taxes, arguing, “We should not have to pay to make up for the rich folks in New York who are getting raped by their local and state governments.”

Advertisement

Suozzi later pointed out Van Duyne was born and went to college in upstate New York – leading to audible gasps in the room.

Van Duyne said there was “a reason” she left.

BROWN UNIVERSITY IN GOP CROSSHAIRS AFTER STUDENT’S DOGE-LIKE EMAIL KICKS OFF FRENZY

“We’re sorry you left New York, but in some ways it may have worked out better for all of us,” Suozzi said.

The SALT deduction cap, however, is still a politically tricky issue even as House lawmakers debate what Republicans hoped would be the final bill.

Advertisement

The legislation would raise the $10,000 SALT deduction cap to $30,000 for most single and married tax filers – a figure that Republicans in higher cost-of-living areas said was not enough.

Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., threatened to vote against the final bill if the new cap remains.

As the committee’s marathon meeting continued, a group of blue state Republicans are huddling with House GOP leaders to find a compromise on a way forward.

Rep. Nick LaLota, R-N.Y., hinted at tensions in the meeting when he posted on X that Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., a member of the SALT Caucus and Ways & Means Committee, “wasn’t involved in today’s meeting” because her district required “something different than mine and the other most SALTY five.”

Malliotakis had told Fox News Digital she was supportive of the $30,000 cap. She’s also the only member of the SALT Caucus on the critical tax-writing panel.

Advertisement
Beth Van Duyne on Capitol Hill

Rep. Beth Van Duyne got into a heated back-and-forth with Rep. Tom Suozzi.

The Agriculture Committee, which began its meeting on Tuesday evening, saw Democrats waste no time in accusing Republicans of trying to gut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), colloquially known as food stamps.

Rep. Adam Gray, D-Calif., accused Republicans of worrying that “somebody is getting a meal they didn’t deserve or kids are getting too fat” instead of more critical issues.

Republicans, like Rep. Randy Feenstra, R-Iowa, touted the bill’s inclusion of crop insurance for young farmers, increasing opportunity for export markets, and helping invest in national animal disaster centers aimed at preventing and mitigating livestock illness.

He also said Republicans were working to “secure” SNAP from waste and abuse.

Advertisement

House and Senate Republicans are working on Trump’s agenda via the budget reconciliation process, which allows the party in power to sideline the minority by lowering the Senate’s threshold for passage to a simple majority, provided the legislation at hand deals with spending, taxes or the national debt.

Trump wants Republicans to use the maneuver for a sweeping bill on his tax, border, immigration, energy and defense priorities.

Two sources familiar with the plan said the House Budget Committee intends to advance the full bill, the first step to getting the legislation to a House-wide vote, on Friday.

Continue Reading

Politics

Newsom claims Trump's tariffs will reduce California revenues by $16 billion

Published

on

Newsom claims Trump's tariffs will reduce California revenues by  billion

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Office said Tuesday that President Trump’s tariff policies will reduce revenue in California by $16 billion through next year.

Despite personal income tax and corporate tax receipts in the state coming in $6.8 billion above projections through April, the Newsom administration is predicting that overall revenue will be lower than they could have been from January 2025 through June 2026 because of the economic impact of Trump’s tariffs.

The governor released the new information, which his team dubbed the “Trump Slump,” on the eve of the presentation of his revised 2025-26 state budget plan, seeking to blame the president for California’s expected revenue shortfall. His office has not released any additional figures about the state budget.

Newsom is expected Wednesday to project a deficit for California in the year ahead with Medi-Cal costs exceeding expectations, including his signature policy to provide free healthcare coverage to low-income undocumented immigrants. The new shortfall comes in addition to $27.3 billion in financial remedies, including $16.1 billion in cuts and a $7.1-billion withdrawal from the state’s rainy day fund, that lawmakers and the governor already agreed to make in 2025-26.

The deficit marks the third year in a row that Newsom and lawmakers have been forced to reduce spending after dedicating more money to programs than the state has available to spend. Poor projections, the ballooning cost of Democratic policy promises and a reluctance to make long-term sweeping cuts have added to the deficit at a time when the governor regularly touts California’s place as the fourth-largest economy in the world.

Advertisement

Trump implemented a series of tariffs on all imported goods, higher taxes on items from Mexico, Canada and China, and specific levies on products and materials such as autos and aluminum, in April. The president has backed down from some of his tariffs, but Newsom alleges that the policies and economic uncertainty will lead to higher unemployment, inflation, lower GDP projections and less capital gains revenue for California.

California filed a lawsuit last month contending that Trump lacks the authority to impose tariffs on his own. On Tuesday, the state said it will seek a preliminary injunction to freeze the tariffs in federal court.

Continue Reading

Trending