Prof. Alan Dershowitz on Harvard’s Demise

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Joining me now is Professor Alan Dershowitz. He is professor
emeritus at Harvard and best selling author. Alan, it is
great to have you on the Kuner Report. I've got
to ask you, as a professor emeritus at Harvard, how
do you feel now about President Trump freezing over two

(00:22):
billion dollars in federal funds, threatening to freeze nine billion
dollars in taxpayer funds, and maybe even now revoking Harvard's
tax exempt status? Agree? Disagree?

Speaker 2 (00:36):
I would ask all the listeners to go back to
a time when I was in college in the nineteen fifties,
when colleges were forced to integrate in Alabama and Mississippi,
and masked klansmen would be preventing black students from going
to class, teachers would be teaching white supremacy in class,

(01:03):
and the Justice Department was threatening these universities. Would anybody
out there be opposed to the federal government cutting off
funding to racist Southern schools that were not protecting black
students and not protecting against the abuse of classes by teachers.

(01:24):
Now the shoes on the other foot, and the people
being protected are Jews and Christians and Zionists and conservatives.
So principally. In principle, you can't make the argument that
the federal government has no proper role to play in
preventing harassment of black students Jewish students. You can't say

(01:47):
it's different because back in the fifties it was black
students that were being protected. Today it's Jewish students that
are being protected. So you have to think of this
in context. Has the Trump administration gone too far? Of
course they shouldn't be cutting off a to research projects,
but they should be cutting off a to groups that

(02:08):
call themselves human rights groups at Harvard, at Harvard Law
School and that are completely biased. They should be cutting
off a to departments that foment anti Semitism. They should
be cutting off a to colleges that refuse to discipline
masked students, who are preventing Jewish students from coming to class.

(02:30):
This is a far more nuanced issue, and many of
the same people who are leading the campaign against the
Trump administration would be joining the government if they were
fighting against racism against black people, or if they were
fighting against homophobia, or if they were fighting against discrimination

(02:53):
against women. You cannot have a double standard for Jews
and for everybody else. And that's why this is a
nuanced issue. And I'm hoping that Harvard will will settle
this case because some of the things the government is
asking for are absolutely correct, some of the things are
absolutely wrong, and some of the things are subject to negotiations.

(03:14):
This is not a black and white issue.

Speaker 1 (03:18):
I agree with you, I completely agree with you. Let
me ask you this, Professor Dershowitz, what do you say,
just to play devil's advocate this you know, the argument
that the administration's making, that many professors and students at
Harvard are making, that Trump is a bully, that Trump
is trying to control Harvard, that he is violating the

(03:39):
free speech rights of these pro Palestinian students, of these
anti Israel in many cases, anti Semitic professors, and that you,
Alan Dershowitz, are wrong. That Harvard is a private institution.
And if they want to allow Palestinians, or if they
want to allow pro Hamas supporters, or if they want

(04:00):
to talk, you know, spread Jew hatred or go on
against Israel and vilify the state of Israel, that is
their first Amendment, right, what say you?

Speaker 2 (04:10):
What I would argue is that none of these people
who are making that argument would be making the argument
if these were klansmen who were wearing hoods and were
harassing black students. These are phony arguments. They are not
principled arguments. Unless you're prepared to say that a private
university can encourage black hatred gay hatred, then you cannot

(04:35):
say that a private university is entitled to encourage Jew hatred.
You have to have a single standard. That's all I'm
asking for. I know some of these professors who are
bringing these lawsuits. They are virulently anti Israel and anti Semitic,
and they would be jumping up and down for joy

(04:56):
if the federal government were cutting off funding for anti gay,
or anti transphobic, or anti you name it, anti female,
or anti black attitude. So you need a single standard.
And until we get the single standard, I'm not going
to be on the side of these phonies who are

(05:18):
actually in favor of anti Israel, anti Semitic. Take, for example,
the case of this guy Khalil. Would any of these
people be supporting Khalil if he were a Nazi opposed
to black people, If he were calling for the lynching
of blacks, if he was circulating memos on the campus,

(05:41):
if he were blocking black students from going to class.
I refuse to participate in hypocrisy, and that's what we're
seeing on college campuses today is hypocrisy. So I'm hoping
that the university will sit down. They've already hired two
lawyers who are very close to Trump, and I think
that sends a message that they're ready to negotiate. And

(06:04):
I hope they will negotiate and they will admit that
some of the things that the federal government is demanding
are absolutely correct, and they would be on this side
of the people demanding it if the victims of the
discrimination on campus were black instead of you. So what
we're seeing is racism by some of these professors who

(06:25):
are insisting on academic freedom only from me.

Speaker 1 (06:28):
But not for thee Professor Dershowitz, I think maybe the
final question I have for you is this, if you
were not professor emeritus today, but you were a professor
as you were twenty what is it, twenty thirty years ago,
teaching on campus good eleven years ago? Would you feel threatened?

(06:49):
Would you feel intimidated if you had to teach on
the campus today.

Speaker 2 (06:54):
I can tell you the facts. I was one of
the most popular lecturers and teachers. Until eleven years ago,
I have never once been asked back to speak about Israel.
Since October seventh, I have offered to come to Harvard,
I have offered to debate. They do not want to
hear my pro Israel point of view, even though it's
a moderate two state solution pro Israel point of view.

(07:17):
The students at Harvard are being denied my point of
view and the point of view of millions of others
who are different from the radical left anti Israel perspective
that we see among so many professors at Harvard. So yeah,
I wouldn't feel intimidated because I'd stand up and fight
for my rights. That's who I am. But right now,

(07:40):
somebody with my views are canceled at Harvard. We can't
speak at Harvard. And that's a real problem. And that's today.
That's not you know, eleven years ago, that's today. I
have offered over and over again to come to Harvard
and to debate anti Israel speakers.

Speaker 3 (07:56):
They will not accept it.

Speaker 2 (07:58):
The one time that a student groups me to come
to Harvard, they had to move my speech off campus
for fear of my life. That if I made a
pro Israel's statement on the Harvard campus, I would be
in danger of being beaten up. That's Harvard today, and
unless it improves, things are going to go and get worse.

(08:18):
And they're worse at Berkeley, and they're worse in other
places in the United States. And so Harvard has proved
that it is not capable of governing itself. And so
just like the University of Mississippi was not capable of
governing itself in the nineteen fifties. And so federal intervention

(08:39):
under various titles of the Civil Rights Law are appropriate.
They shouldn't overdo it. No research should be cut back
that deals with science and cancer and everything else. But
when you get a human rights group at Harvard Law
School that only focuses on Israel and doesn't focus on
much more serious human rights. When you get a professor

(09:01):
at Yale who calls on a student and the student speaks,
he says, are you speaking with an Israeli accent? And
the student says yes, And the professor says, you cannot
speak unless you're willing to admit you're a war criminal.
Should we the taxpayer be funding that department? The Middle
East Studies department at Yale.

Speaker 1 (09:19):
Oh absolutely, no, I know you're dead on, you're dead on.
Look if I can squeeze one more question out.

Speaker 2 (09:24):
Of you at Harvard Laschool.

Speaker 1 (09:26):
Yeah, Professor Derschowitz, we got about a minute left, but
I've got to ask you, in your view, what accounts
for this explosion of jew hatred and anti semitism Harvard, Yale,
all of these elite institutions. What do you think is
the root cause?

Speaker 2 (09:44):
Number one, it's DEI Diversity Inclusion and Equity and Inclusion,
which is a hotbed of anti Semitism. Number two, it's
these ethnic departments, Middle East Studies, even Jewish studies, Gay studies,
Women's studies. These are not true academic enterprises. These are political, partisan,

(10:06):
ideological propaganda mils. And on October eighth, when thirty two
groups at Harvard blamed what happened on October seventh on Israel,
much of it came from these departments, these bureaucracies. And
until and unless these bureaucracies are rooted out, and we're
going to see left wing professors, a hard left, anti American,

(10:31):
anti Christian groups dominate at schools like Harvard, And that's
the problem is much deeper than just a few people
blocking access to campuses. We're seeing a culture of hatred
against Western democracy, against the United States, against Israel, and

(10:52):
against Jews and against Christians, and that has to be
rooted out. And of course the Trump administration, as most administrations,
has went too far, and that's why we need a
negotiated settlement where some of the demands have to be
met as a condition of federal funding.

Speaker 1 (11:11):
We have been talking with Professor Alan Dershowitz, Professor emeritus
at Harvard University. Professor is always dynamite stuff and you're
always welcome back on the Kuner Report. Thank you so much.

Speaker 2 (11:23):
Thanks someonelways happy to be on. Thank you, Take care.

Speaker 1 (11:26):
Okay, you heard the professor your reaction. Six one seven
two six six sixty eight sixty eight. Six one seven
two six six sixty eight sixty eight is the number. Okay,
By the way, it's all on the table. You want
to talk about Chris van Holland and how the left
is now turning this guy Kilmar Brago Garcia into a martyr,

(11:52):
this MS thirteen wife beating human trafficking terrorists, We can
definitely talk about that. Letitia James obviously been talking about
it for a good part of the morning. But we
can also talk about what Alan Dershowitz was on. I
have to I didn't want to quibble with him, to
be honest, because I thought his larger point was dead
on that the very same radical leftists, if this was

(12:17):
being done against blacks or gays or other minorities, would
be applauding Trump for freezing federal funding. I think on
that he's a thousand percent correct, no question, no question.
But the one part that I would quibble with him
on is when he said about, well, you should cut

(12:38):
some funding, but not all of the funding, you know,
for cancer research or for medical purposes. Look, Harvard has
a fifty three billion dollar endowment. Now think of that,
fifty three billion dollars and apparently just Harvard, Okay, I'm

(13:03):
just talking about hal It. They get nine billion dollars
in taxpayer funds, nine billion in federal funds. Now, my
question to all of you is, why the hell is
Harvard getting anything And I'm talking even a penny from
the taxpayer. Ay, They've got a fifty three billion dollar endowment.

(13:27):
They're loaded, They've got enough money to last them hundreds
of years. So why do you need money from the
federal government, I from taxpayer money, federal funds, So I
would cut off all federal funding completely, not just because
it's a wash in a sea of antisemitism and Jew hatred,

(13:49):
which it is not, because Harvard is a racist institution.
And that's not just an opinion, it's a fact. The
Supreme Court rule just a couple of years ago that
they were openly, repeatedly deliberately discriminating against Asians and Asian
Americans in their admissions, just like by the way they

(14:14):
used to discriminate against Jews and against blacks one hundred
years ago in their admissions. So Harvard's always been, frankly
a racist institution. But you know, let that go. So
do I want to give a racist institution money? Absolutely not.
But even if they weren't racist, you're sitting on fifty

(14:37):
three billion dollars. You go one of the biggest endowments
in the world tax free. Remember now Trump may remove
the tax exempt status, but as things stand right now,
that's tax exemp that's tax free. So I want you
to think about the absurdity of this. An institution swimming

(14:57):
in billions and billions and billions of dollars is asking
the government, which is broke. They're asking us, we're broke,
we have no money. So people that have money are
asking people who don't have money, because we're running two
trillion dollar deficits every year, to continue to give them

(15:20):
even more money. Does this make any sense to you?
It doesn't make any sense to me. So I would
financially cut. And it's not just Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Cornell.
I don't care. All of the elite institutions in our

(15:40):
country not a single din in taxpayer federal money. And
let me just say one other thing. All of that
taxpayer money, and it amounts to billions and billions and
billions paid for by you know, taxpayers. Most Americans do
not have a college degree. Most Americans only have a

(16:05):
high school diploma. So my point being is, you have
Americans who work hard for their money who've never been
to college or don't have a college degree. We have
to essentially subsidize the wealthy, most privileged educated members of

(16:27):
our society. I don't think so, absolutely not. All right,
let me throw a super quick log on the fire,
and then I want to go right back to the
blazing phone lines. By the way, A line or two
is open. If you want to jump on, now's the
time to do it. Six one seven two six six
sixty eight, sixty eight. The argument being made by the Democrats,

(16:53):
the media, and even some libertarians and conservatives, some not many,
but some so, that Trump has no business and the
Trump administration has no business dictating content at a university. Yes,
it's billions of dollars in federal funding, Yes they tend

(17:15):
to come with strings attached, but that Trump should not
be telling them what they should be allowed or not
allowed to say or do on campus. That this is
a form of coercing speech. This is what they argue,
and as I discussed with Professor Dershowitz, violating free speech,

(17:39):
and that Trump now is trying to impose his view
upon the faculty and students of Harvard. Do you agree
or disagree? My position is very simple. Harvard, like all
like Columbia, like all of these elite universities, have become

(18:01):
a cesspool of anti Semitism, jew hatred, anti Americanism, Marxism, communism,
radical leftism. And if you're going to be taking people's money,
then I'm sorry. I don't want to subsidize hate. I

(18:22):
don't want to subsidize hate. And yeah, you have the
right to express your viewpoints. You don't have the right
to shut people down. You don't have the right to
prevent people from going to class. You don't have the
right to harass people, say Jewish students on campus. You
don't have the right to threaten them or bully them,

(18:42):
or say you want to kill them or murder them.
That's terrorism, that's criminal behavior, and that's unacceptable. Public institution,
private institution, public university, private university. And let me just
make one last, final final point. Harvard, in their argument

(19:02):
with Trump now, in their battle with Trump, keeps insisting
we're a private institution. You don't have the right to
tell us what we can or can't say on campus. Okay, fine,
then don't take any tax payer money. If you're private,
then be fully private. But no, no, you want to

(19:24):
have your cake and eat it too. You want the
nine billion to keep coming in even though you've got
a fifty billion plus endowment. To show how greedy these
people are. And by the way, these are the ones
going on about, you know, inequity and injustice and unfairness

(19:44):
and the ninety nine percent versus the one percent, as
they get richer and richer, and fatter and fatter and
thicker and thicker. But let that go. If you're going
to take tax payer money, then you're no longer fully private.
So I'm sorry, but I don't want my taxpayer dollars

(20:08):
to be subsidizing jew hatred, anti Semitism, and frankly, the
indoctrination of students to hate Western culture, Western civilization, America,
our constitution, our heritage, and everything this good, decent country

(20:28):
stands for. Now, you want to be a radical Marxist institution,
do it on your time and your dime, but you're
not going to get my money, and you shouldn't get
my money, agree or any taxpayer money. Agree, disagree? Frank
in Gloucester, Thanks for holding Frank, and welcome.

Speaker 3 (20:51):
I got a question for you. I'm wondering, what's to
stop a democratic president from said to you, to Al
Salvadre for all, you weren't bought in this country. What's
the stopping from doing it? Are you?

Speaker 1 (21:08):
Are you serious or are you trying?

Speaker 3 (21:11):
I'm serious, I'm serious, okay.

Speaker 1 (21:14):
Number one, I'm a citizen of this country. Number two,
I can't my god, this guy's dumb. I mean This
is shocking, honestly, Frank, even by your standards. Holy mackerel,
Holy mackerel. Number two, I came into this country legally.

(21:34):
I got a student visa, then I got to work visa.
Then I got a green card, then I became a
naturalized citizen. I was properly vetted. I obeyed the laws
of this country. I didn't break the laws of this
country to get in. So just because you deport a criminal,

(21:59):
illegal alien, does it mean all of a sudden you're
going to start deporting American citizens? What American citizen you know, really, Dingbat,
What American citizen has Trump deported to All Salvador? Can
you name me one? Name me, just one, one American
citizen that he has deported to El Salvador. One. Just

(22:22):
name me one, genius.

Speaker 3 (22:24):
Can I answer you a question?

Speaker 1 (22:25):
Don't ask me a question. Answer my question. I answered
your question. Listen to me. I answered your question. You
answer mine. Name me one American citizen that he has
deported to All Salvador one.

Speaker 3 (22:38):
Okay, all right, answer you made a mistake and in
the meantime.

Speaker 1 (22:42):
Okay, so you're not gonna right, so you're not answering
my question. Now, Number because you don't have an answer,
because you're lying like you liberals always do. Now, number two, genius,
tell me this guy Abrago Garcia that you're bleeding for.
Tell me, are you telling me that we don't have
the right to deport a criminal illegal alien back to

(23:03):
his home country? Is that what you're telling me now, Frank.

Speaker 3 (23:07):
No, No, I'm telling you that a Democratic president to
deport you and share your head down on Ol Salvador
And now all they have to do is say, Upstreet
made a mistake.

Speaker 1 (23:18):
Well, no, he he deported a criminal illegal alien who's
a member of MS thirteen, who doesn't belong in this country,
who will be deported no matter what. He's not a
citizen of this country. Don't you want can you get
in your mind through that? Now, if a Democratic president
did that to me, that would be a high crime

(23:39):
and misdemeanor. Literally that would lead to the impeachment of
this president, of this Democrat president. So I don't know
what you're talking about. Criminal illegal aliens are not entitled
to the same rights and protections as legal immigrants, legal residents,
and citizen sins of the United States. A criminal illegal alien,

(24:05):
especially one who is part of a designated terrorist organization
as is, MS thirteen, by law, can be deported immediately.
So Trump is abiding by the law. He's doing what's right,
He's doing what he campaigned on. And if you can't
comprehend the fundamental difference between deporting a criminal, illegal alien

(24:35):
who is not supposed to be in America and who
happens to also be a terrorist with lawfully deporting, in
your view, an American citizen, then I'm sorry, you are
so colossally stupid you can't be helped. We're talking negative IQ.

(25:00):
Did that penetrate that tick skull of yours?

Speaker 3 (25:02):
Frank Jeff? The president can say all them things, you
are a terrorist, you belong to MS thirteen, And then
they can say he made a mistake. That's like he
did that? Guy, God, you know I made a mistake.

Speaker 1 (25:19):
No, he's an illegal alien. No one denies that. No
one denies that. Two courts and two judges have said
he's a member of MS thirteen. MS thirteen have said
he's a member of MS thirteen. So I don't know
an MS thirteen is designated as a foreign terrorist organization.

(25:42):
You see what you don't understand because it would you
don't read a newspaper, because that's how stupid you are.
Is that the administrative error that you're talking about this
quote unquote oops, it was a mistake, was that he
shouldn't have been on the first two plane loads. They
were shipping out planeloads of MS thirteen and Trendurragua. He

(26:06):
wasn't scheduled to be on the first two planeloads. But
he was always going to be deported because he's a
criminal illegal alien. That's why criminal illegals are going to
be deported. By law, they must be deported. He's an

(26:28):
e legal alien who he just found out, by the way,
committed another crime. He beat his wife. In fact, he
beat his wife multiple times. She filed restraining orders on him,
she called the police on him. The do you explain

(26:48):
it now? Can you understand it now? Frank Hello, Yeah,
sinking in.

Speaker 3 (26:53):
Jeff, Yeah, Jess. Don't call me stupid because I've never desulted.
You don't call me snoop. That's what you're doing. You
lost the argument.

Speaker 1 (27:02):
No, you insult me all the time. You know that.
That's number one and two. I'm sorry, but stupid is
as stupid does, and stupid speaks. So you're trying to
claim this ridiculous scenario, and you're kind of threatening me.

(27:22):
You're hinting at it that I should be deported. That's
what you're really trying to say, because I'm a naturalized American,
that I should be deported. And honestly, you should be
ashamed of yourself. Now look, hey, buddy, it's your life.
You want to defend a criminal, illegal alien and a terrorist.

(27:43):
I'm busting a gut here. We've been talking off here.
I gotta say, you know, Sandy and Mike are very
very funny when they want to be, they're very very funny.
So I set to Sandy and Mike. I go, no,
really like, I go, nobody can be that dumb? I
go honestly like, is he a troll? And no, really

(28:04):
is he? Is he just trying to get a rise
out of me? And the audience are like, can get
Frank in Gloucester? Is he really that stupid? And Sandy says,
did you listen to Biden's speech a couple nights ago.
That's a yellow dog Democrat. That's how they are. And
then you know, and Sandy made a really good point.

(28:24):
She goes, Jeff, they so blindly follow the Democratic party
line that if if you barbecue a baby on Boston
Common in public square, and the Democrat said, yeah, it's fine,
go ahead, they'd be like, oh, okay, barbecute the baby.
Okay ay, yeah, yea. Many of you are saying that

(28:48):
he's uh now that the joke many of you are
saying is, instead of dumber than a box of rocks,
Frank is dumber than Bill and Sudbury. I agree. I
just I thought Bill was the dumbest. No, no, this guy,
this guy, this guy even puts Bill and Sudbury to shame.

(29:09):
All Right, Mike's in my ear mirror, mirror on the wall.
Who's the dumbest liberal of them all? Frank? Frank? Okay.
New York Post broke the story just very quick because
the lines are I want to go to I want

(29:29):
to get some of the callers. But New York Post
broke the story straight from the Department of Justice, Department
of Homeland Security, and police records. So Maryland police records,
DHS records, and DOJ documents. So this guy Brago Garcia,
the one that everybody is. All these left wingers are

(29:52):
falling over themselves. He was arrested in the company of
known MS thirteen gang members carrying marijuana and wads of cash,
apparently multiple MS thirteen gang bangers, and a police informant
who had penetrated MS thirteen said that he's an active

(30:13):
or we're at the time whatever when the arrest was made,
was an active MS thirteen member with the rank within
MS thirteen. And I don't know what this means exactly,
but check ko check cooey sorry cch e q u
eo check cooey or check cooo. Anyway, I don't know

(30:34):
what check cooo, what their rank is, but he had
some kind of a rank. And his street name is
MS thirteen. Street name was chell A. I think it's
pronounced cle a ch e l e.

Speaker 3 (30:50):
So.

Speaker 1 (30:51):
And then there's all this stuff. Now, multiple times he
beat up his wife, multiple times, the cops had to
be called, multiple training orders. He punched her, he scratched her,
he beat her up, he tore off her shirt. Now,
if this, if this is the guy that the media

(31:13):
and the Democrats are holding up as the poster child
of President Trump wrongfully deporting someone, I'm telling you he's
doing an amazing job. Just keep deporting. Don't stop deporting, baby,
Janine in North Reading. Thanks for holding Janine, and welcome.

Speaker 4 (31:33):
Good morning, Jeff, Thanks for taking my call.

Speaker 1 (31:35):
My pleasure to great show. As always, thank you.

Speaker 4 (31:39):
Just a quick point, actually speaking to the Harvard situation,
we know they're stopping to dot Not only do they
have an incredibly massive endowment and don't need our federal dollars,
but they use those federal dollars. People forget. They're very
integral and policy setting, lustist policy set. They're an extremely

(32:01):
partisan group that creates policy that harms families and most
of us in America who would like to, you know,
have our conservative family values respected.

Speaker 1 (32:14):
Oh you're dead on, Jinine. Honestly, you're absolutely dead on, Janine.
Do you think Trump is going to break Harvard? Do
you think he's going to force them to make the
necessary changes or do you think Harvard's going to basically
walk away from nine billion and maybe even their tax
exempt status? What do you think?

Speaker 4 (32:36):
Abbas of behemos and they have their hands in absolutely
everything everywhere. I don't like to vote against Trump, that
this is a real beast he's up against.

Speaker 1 (32:50):
You know, I got to say, how many politicians now
are coming up to bat for Harvard you're right, and
it's not just Democrats, it's Republicans. How many in the
media are batting for Harvard. You're right. They got their
finger in every pie, absolutely every pie. And you know,
and to me, the one the tax exem status that

(33:13):
I think they can survive the nine billion, but they're
so greedy they don't want to lose that tax exem status.
Trump takes away that tax exem status, that could be
his ace in the hole. But I agree with you, Janine,
Harvard is big, Harvard is powerful, and they're going to
give Trump a real fight on his hands. Janine, excellent point.

(33:35):
Thank you so much for calling in.