Give Us The Money! Harvard Fights for Us All

The Founders' Lost Texts

Amid the boredom of a non-Christian pope's death and the media's obsession with the Signal messaging app, I found myself reading about Pearl Harbor this week. It seems that as hell rained down, Marines, sailors, firemen and civilians grabbed their guns and began firing wildly in the sky at the Japanese planes.

And none of those pilots was given due process.

Obviously, the traditional history of Pearl Harbor is all wrong. It's not about a sneak attack on the U.S. Pacific Fleet. The real story is that there was ZERO due process. Americans just shot at the pilots on the theory that they were enemy aliens, but with no proof, certainly no proof that would satisfy a New York Times editor.

Not only that, but none of the Japanese pilots was given a lawyer, and there were no hearings whatsoever and no official adjudication of their guilt. I'm sure one or two of those pilots was, "Maryland Man," "Tennessee Man” or "Ohio Man."

Where's the ACLU? They've been asleep at the switch for decades on this denial of constitutional rights. Let me tell you, if Chris Van Hollen had been alive, he would have raised bloody hell.

That was the day democracy died.

At least we can count on Harvard University to stand on its constitutional rights. As President Trump revs up a fleet of Brinks trucks to take away all of Harvard's money, I came across some documents proving that the Framers anticipated the exact situation Harvard is in right now.

I'm going to be making the documents public soon, but it's blindingly clear that both James Madison and Alexander Hamilton were insistent that if an educational institution with a $50 billion endowment, teaching anti-white history and being led by a beclowned plagiarist president, asks for multiple millions of taxpayer dollars, that request shall not be denied.

The accidentally deleted 11 1/2th Amendment would have read: "Harvard University shall be given as much money as it wants," and be colloquially known as the "Unf-ngbelievable Entitlement" clause.

Debate over the 11 1/2th Amendment led to some of the biggest brawls in Philadelphia (until the Eagles won their first Super Bowl), with Hamilton arguing that such a provision would be the dictionary definition of "chutzpah," and Madison countering that Harvard would be so steeped in Jew-hating that it wouldn't know what the word meant.

This is precisely the argument Harvard has made in its brief. Not merely that they are insisting on our money, but that they have a "constitutional" right to it, referring to the college's "defense of its own constitutional freedoms," and accusing the government of "punish[ing] Harvard for protecting its constitutional rights."

Yes, exactly. It's right there in the 11 1/2th Amendment.

The "Unf-ngbelievable Entitlement" clause doesn't spell it out, but, as I know (and Harvard knows), under no circumstances does it apply to Christian colleges, like Bob Jones University. Only committed anti-white universities, like Harvard. Because of Bob Jones' appalling, fundamentalist reading of the Bible and the Tower of Babel to prohibit interracial dating, the school was stripped of its tax-exempt status in 1970, and the IRS's ruling was upheld by the Supreme Court, 8-1.

The court found that, "underlying all relevant parts of the [IRS] Code, is the intent that entitlement to tax exemption depends on meeting certain common law standards of charity -- namely, that an institution seeking tax-exempt status must serve a public purpose and not be contrary to established public policy."

Meaning, of course, that Harvard may openly discriminate against whites, promote mediocrities based on their not being white, hire incompetents and reject qualified applicants, entirely on the criterion: "white or not-white?" -- and none of that is contrary to established public policy. Do not bore me with citations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. Inapposite! We're talking about Harvard.

As Sen. Van Hollen -- surely, the Democrats' current leading candidate for president -- has demonstrated, it's not that hard to stand on principle. You just need unparallelled courage and a Mad Libs booklet.

I will fight for ...

[horses, my friends, the Knicks, MS-13 gang members]

Van Hollen: MS-13 gang members!

because they are ...

[deserving, pretty, undemanding, domestic violence abusers]

Van Hollen: domestic violence abusers!

who are in ...

[trouble, love, the doghouse, our country illegally].

Van Hollen: our country illegally!

In the face of Trump's approval rating soaring with every planeload of illegals he sends to El Salvador, Democrats have hit on the perfect response.

COPYRIGHT 2025 ANN COULTER