Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

White House claims letter to Harvard with demands was an ‘unauthorized’ mistake: NYT
CNBC ^ | April 19, 2025 | Erin Doherty

Posted on 04/19/2025 2:57:32 PM PDT by karpov

The White House letter sent to Harvard University outlining a list of demands about the university’s hiring and admissions was sent without authorization, according to the New York Times, citing two unnamed people familiar with the matter.

The April 11 letter, which demanded that Harvard eliminate its DEI programs and screen international students for ideological concerns, among other sweeping changes, was “unauthorized,” people familiar with the matter told the Times.

The contents of the letter were authentic, but “there were differing accounts inside the administration of how it had been mishandled,” per the Times.

The letter was signed by Josh Gruenbaum, the commissioner of the General Services Administration, Sean R. Kevney, the acting general counsel of the Department of Health and Human Services and Thomas E. Wheeler, the acting general counsel of the Department of Education.

A Harvard spokesperson said in a statement to CNBC that “the letter that Harvard received on Friday, April 11, was signed by three federal officials, placed on official letterhead, was sent from the e-mail inbox of a senior federal official, and was sent on April 11 as promised.”

“Recipients of such correspondence from the U.S. government—even when it contains sweeping demands that are astonishing in their overreach—do not question its authenticity or seriousness,” the spokesperson said.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: harvard

1 posted on 04/19/2025 2:57:32 PM PDT by karpov
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: karpov

BS

NYT propaganda.

“According” to the NYT. 2 “unnamed sources”.

Cue the gullible arguments.


2 posted on 04/19/2025 2:59:06 PM PDT by Fledermaus ("It turns out all we really needed was a new President!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

I’ll withhold believing anything from the corrupt unethical NYT until other named sources confirm it.


3 posted on 04/19/2025 3:02:24 PM PDT by falcon99 ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov
"...people familiar with the matter told the Times."

More flushing is needed...
Flush with prejudice!

4 posted on 04/19/2025 3:03:44 PM PDT by SuperLuminal (Where is rabble-rising Sam Adams now that we need him? Is his name Trump, now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov
“Recipients of such correspondence from the U.S. government—even when it contains sweeping demands that are astonishing in their overreach—do not question its authenticity or seriousness,” the spokesperson said.

No - they run off to find a lawyer to go judge shopping for them.

5 posted on 04/19/2025 3:03:50 PM PDT by grobdriver (The CDC can KMA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus

Every day. Several posts from the same POS from the same POS sources, and then we never hear back from the person who started the thread.

Same kinds of things every day. BS.


6 posted on 04/19/2025 3:06:19 PM PDT by rlmorel ("A people that elect corrupt politicians are not victims...but accomplices." George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: falcon99; Fledermaus
"...New York Times, citing two unnamed people familiar with the matter..."

Gee. We do have one member of this forum who seems to lap this up every single day and post a thread on it.

Given the content this user posts every day, it is pretty easy to deduce who this person supports. And that supported person is no conservative.

7 posted on 04/19/2025 3:09:04 PM PDT by rlmorel ("A people that elect corrupt politicians are not victims...but accomplices." George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: falcon99
I’ll withhold believing anything from the corrupt unethical NYT until ...

Until? Me, I’ll withhold believing anything from the corrupt unethical NYT full stop.

8 posted on 04/19/2025 3:18:59 PM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: karpov

Lol


9 posted on 04/19/2025 3:20:05 PM PDT by Fuzz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

GFY troll


10 posted on 04/19/2025 3:46:27 PM PDT by Wilderness Conservative (Nature is the ultimate conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov
The contents of the letter were authentic, but “there were differing accounts inside the administration of how it had been mishandled,” per the Times.

Trump needs to figure out who's responsible for this clown show.

11 posted on 04/19/2025 4:52:23 PM PDT by Kleon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SuperLuminal

A Power Flush is always needed when the NYT is involved.


12 posted on 04/19/2025 4:54:36 PM PDT by abbastanza (Oh boy. Can't wait. Go nuts kids. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: karpov
Why are some folks upset that this got posted? Even if it is untrue, the fact that this is being reported by the NYT tells you what the MSM is reporting, and that's good that know just in a "know thine enemy" sense.

I'll never understand those who think that knowing less is better than knowing more.

13 posted on 04/19/2025 4:58:25 PM PDT by Bruce Campbells Chin ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin

I am fascinated that the source for the story was two anonymous sources.

https://ethicsandjournalism.org/resources/best-practices/best-practices-anonymous-sources/

“In general, journalists should avoid using anonymous sources to make accusations or derogatory comments, a practice sometimes called “an unattributed negative.”

Why? Simply because it can look dubious and has a hint of unfairness.

Negative comments from an anonymous source might lead readers to believe that someone with ill-will is hiding behind their anonymity to evade the consequences of their statements.

And, the target of the negative statement has no idea who is making the comment and why.”


14 posted on 04/19/2025 5:01:54 PM PDT by cgbg (It was not us. It was them--all along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin

‘ I’ll never understand those who think that knowing less is better than knowing more.’

It is perplexing, but not surprising. It’s always been like that.


15 posted on 04/19/2025 5:02:45 PM PDT by Fuzz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: karpov

Why does it take three people to write a letter?


16 posted on 04/19/2025 8:21:29 PM PDT by Lisbon1940 (Don’t want to hurt no kangaroos )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson