Desperation as the indictments loom…Trump baselessly claims that Jan. 6 instigators and Gretchen Whitmer kidnap plot were ‘fake’ in CPAC speech,” Just like those who instigated January 6. It was a fake deal. Fake. It was a fake deal,”
- Trump baselessly said Jan. 6 instigators and a plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Whitmer were “fake.”
- He alluded to conspiracy theories about the Capitol riot being orchestrated by FBI agents.
- Trump made the comments while speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Dallas.
- At least nine people close to Donald Trump reportedly requested preemptive pardons following Jan. 6.
- Former Trump aides named six GOP lawmakers while testifying before the Jan. 6 panel this month.
- A former aide also said Mark Meadows and Rudy Giuliani asked the then-president for pardons.
At least six Republican members of Congress requested preemptive pardons from former President Donald Trump in the wake of the Capitol insurrection, according to testimony from former Trump aides last Thursday.
The House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, riot has hosted six public hearings so far revealing their findings, which also included public damning testimony from former staffers in the Trump administration.
GOP Reps. Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene were among the six GOP lawmakers also asked Trump to pardon them for their efforts in trying to overturn the 2020 election.
On the one hand, relativism. On the other, dogmatism: anything goes and cancel culture, queering identities, and identity politics. This contradiction is significant. Critical thought does question the absolute authority of truth. But historicising truth does not mean the end of truth, only of what could be called a theological regime of truth. Raising the question of who is excluded from current definitions of the world does complicate our understanding of truth, but it makes it more truthful, not less.
This is why “post-truth” has nothing to do with Derrida or Foucault. Indeed, it comes from the other side of the political spectrum. We owe “alternative facts” to Trump’s entourage; this became apparent in the campaigns against so-called “gender ideology” or the absurd rumours propagated by Bolsonaro about Fernando Haddad, his main political rival in the presidential election, planning to introduce “gay kits” in primary schools. On the contrary, academia is defined by the obligation to avoid what Princeton philosopher Harry Frankfurt called “bullshit”. Academic freedom is justified by the obligation we share to avoid bullshit (as much as possible). We have a duty to try and maintain an empirically informed, theoretically consistent approach to the search for truth; it may not be absolute, but we nevertheless pursue it as rigorously as we can. That is actually the reason why academia is under attack: critical thought is the best remedy against bullshit. This explains why the far-right proponents of “alternative facts” hate what we do: academic freedom is the obligation to resist the devaluation of truth.
This is a Creative Commons article. The original version of this article appeared here.