The leaked conversation among cabinet members reveals a discussion of proposed reforms for Harvard University under the Trump administration, with differing viewpoints on its intent, potential outcomes, and challenges, particularly in relation to ideological influence and economic considerations.
Subject: Leaked Signal Conversation Regarding Trump’s Harvard Obsession
April 23, 15:00pm ET
Vance (15:00pm ET): Fellow Cabinet Members, I’ve been reviewing the proposed reforms for Harvard University under the Trump administration’s directive.
Hegseth (15:04pm ET): Yeah, the whole “Make Harvard Great Again” thing? I don’t know, seems like a solid move. 💪
Gabbard (15:07pm ET): Certainly, the reforms could make Harvard more efficient and in line with our values. Just like our friends in Russia have done with their education system.
Rubio (15:10pm ET): Guys, let’s keep our focus here. University reform isn’t about promoting ideologies, it’s about improving educational standards and affordability.
Miller (15:15pm ET): Easier said than done, Rubio. The liberal media will never let us do our jobs. Always moaning about diversity and inclusion.
Vance (15:20pm ET): Perhaps, but we should consider this from an economic perspective rather than a purely ideological one. Let’s consider Harvard’s endowment. How do we leverage that for the nation’s benefit?
Gabbard (15:24pm ET): Well, we could learn from our Russian friends. They know how to make institutions work for the nation’s advantage.
Rubio (15:27pm ET): Tulsi, I hope you’re not implying we adopt the Russian model of governance. That’s not who we are or what we stand for.
Waltz (15:30pm ET): We need to ensure that Harvard, as a preeminent academic institution in our country, continues to provide a world-class education. Our objective should be to balance the equities here, not to favor any political agenda.
Hegseth (15:33pm ET): I agree with Waltz. Our military academies function without political bias. Let’s make Harvard an institution of merit, not a playground for liberal elites.
Ratcliffe (15:37pm ET): We need to consider the potential backlash from Harvard alumni and faculty, who may view these reforms as government meddling in academia.
Kent (15:40pm ET): I think we need to seek broad bipartisan support for this initiative. It’s not about politics; it’s about improving education standards in our nation’s universities.
Wiles (15:43pm ET): Gentlemen and lady, we need to ensure we bring this issue to the public. They need to understand why these reforms are necessary.
Witkoff (15:47pm ET): Agreed, Susie. My team and I are working on a strategy to gain public support.
Miller (15:50pm ET): As we move forward, let’s keep in mind that our goal is to ensure that Harvard and other major universities serve our nation’s best interests, not play politics.
Vance (15:55pm ET): I couldn’t agree more, Stephen. Let’s continue this discussion tomorrow, focusing on strategy and messaging.
Hegseth (15:58pm ET): Sounds like a plan to me. Keep on punching, guys. 👊💪🔥🇺🇸
[Chat ended]
