The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Opinion
6 — Wednesday, August 3, 2022
BRANDON COWIT
Managing Editor
Stanford Lipsey Student Publications Building
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.
VANESSA KIEFER
Editor in Chief
From The Daily: For the January 6th Committee,
truth and transparency are their own victory
*A previous version of this article
claimed
that
Richard
Donoghue,
the former acting Deputy Attorney
General, was “persuaded” to claim that
the results of the 2020 election were
fraudulent. He was only encouraged
to claim that, not persuaded. The
statement has since been edited for
clarity.
F
or the past five weeks,
the
U.S.
House
Select
Committee to Investigate
the January 6th Attack on the United
States Capitol has been conducting
hearings to investigate and explain to
the public the exact events that took
place at the Capitol on that fateful
day. Formed last summer, the Select
Committee has only just begun its
proper deliberations, as its leaders
have been focused on collecting the
dozens of witness statements and
documents required to craft the best
possible case for its position on the
attack. A primary goal of the Select
Committee is to hone in on former
President Donald Trump and his role
in the insurrection — whether it be
marring his image as an executive or
prosecuting him for his involvement,
the Select Committee hopes to make it
known that Trump played an integral
role in the plot.
By utilizing key witness testimony
and creating a precise timeline of
events, often down to the minute, the
committee is determined to inform
the American public and prove that
the riots were premeditated, and even
encouraged, by certain politicians. In
the most transparent way possible, the
Select Committee aims to prove that
the events that took place on January
6 posed a direct threat to American
democracy, and that from that day
forward, the sanctity of a democratic
government would forever be held
in jeopardy. As additional evidence
surfaces,
more
testimonies
are
collected and the hearings continue,
the
officials
behind
the
Select
Committee continue to demonstrate
their
commitment
to
protecting
democracy and exposing those who
have endangered it.
With
the
goal
of
defending
democracy in mind, the Select
Committee is making strides to prove
that the claims of election fraud
in 2020 were not only baseless but
also a coordinated misinformation
attack. Richard Donoghue, the former
acting Deputy Attorney General
and a key witness, stated that he
was encouraged in December 2020
by then President Trump to claim
that the results of the election were
fraudulent, after which he explained
to Trump that there was no credible
evidence of election fraud. Since the
2020 election, Trump and his allies
have spread falsehoods about election
workers and mechanisms, which in
turn has defiled the trust that many
Americans had previously held in the
integrity of U.S. democracy.
In a recent hearing, the intricacies
of a December meeting in the Oval
Office were discussed, where Trump
and his personal lawyers expressed
their idealized chain of election
events. When other officials present
did not subscribe to the same beliefs,
the Select Committee claims that
Trump lashed out, and hours later sent
out the infamous tweet that requested
crowds of his “be there” to defend
his so-claimed victory. As the Select
Committee has shown, that lie — that
Trump defeated Joe Biden in the 2020
presidential election — fueled the
series of events leading up to January
6. And that lie, in turn, was propagated
by months of misinformation about
election officials, voting machines
and mail-in voting. If the public takes
one thing away from the hearings, it
should be the importance of rejecting
misinformation wherever it may be
found.
While
the
Select
Committee
continues to bring the truth about the
January 6 attack to light, it is important
to keep in mind how propaganda and
misinformation has historically been
used to bring about substantive policy
changes. One of the best examples
of this is how American media and
the United States government have
perpetuated lies surrounding Cuba for
decades in order to prop up aggressive
anti-Cuban policies. Cuban journalist
Liz Oliva Fernández, creator of “The
War on Cuba” docuseries on Youtube,
analyzes the disconnect between
reality in Cuba and the way the
United States reports Cuban news.
Though Cuba recently experienced its
largest anti-government protest since
the Cuban Revolution, Fernández
— who was at the protest herself —
shows numerous American media
outlets
that
hugely
exaggerated
both the violence committed during
the protests and the duration of the
protests, with some media outlets
falsely reporting that the protests
went on for weeks. In turn, Americans
who were misled by United States
media sources called on Biden to
further economically suffocate Cuba,
to which Biden hastily responded
with new sanctions on Cuba. This is
just one example of disinformation —
at times perpetuated by our very own
government — swaying policymaking.
Yet another example of falsehoods
shifting public opinion and influencing
policy proposals occurred in 2013
with the Border Security, Economic
Opportunity,
and
Immigration
Modernization
Act.
Following
9/11, xenophobic and Islamaphobic
rhetoric circulated and spread quickly
in response to widespread public
fear of global terror. This, too, was
largely fueled by misinformation and
fear-mongering practices. Despite
the obvious fact that anti-immigrant
perspectives lacked merit, the Senate
swiftly and bipartisanly passed the
bill, which would have wreaked havoc
on immigrants seeking citizenship
in the United States had the House
considered it and enacted the bill into
law.
QUIN ZAPOLI
Editorial Page Editor
Jim Harbaugh doesn’t
speak for me
Pro-choice, but pro-
democracy
MOLLY FESSLER
U-M Medical Student
*This article represents the views
of the author alone, not the Gold
Humanism Honor Society nor the
University
of
Michigan
Medical
School.
A
s a fourth-year medical
student and member of the
University of Michigan
Medical School’s Gold Humanism
Honor Society, I write today to share
that I, a pro-choice future healthcare
provider, voted for Dr. Kristin Collier
to speak at the incoming first-year
students’ White Coat Ceremony.
Collier’s nomination, as readers
may
recall,
was
not
without
controversy,
given
her
pro-life
beliefs. While the University stood
by Collier as the speaker, many
incoming first-year medical students
walked out before her remarks began
at the White Coat Ceremony on
July 24. In the preceding coverage
of this event, students have been
quoted anonymously voicing their
opposition.
I wanted to offer an alternative
view: a defense of my vote and a
defense of democracy. I am glad that
my new classmates had a chance
to voice their opposition. I am also
grateful that Collier retained her
platform to speak.
I initially voted, months ago, for
Collier because she upholds the
tenets of humanism and compassion
that inspire me to be a physician.
This is the purpose of the White
Coat Ceremony — to welcome new
medical students to medicine and
remind them of the profundity of
their induction and future service
as a physician. Collier has been a
mentor to me for the past two years;
she is encouraging and selfless in
her support. She is tremendously
supportive of many students in
multiple facets of undergraduate
and graduate medical education. She
runs a spirituality program at the
University that regularly encourages
open, collaborative dialogue with
speakers
from
numerous,
often
opposing ideologies and backgrounds.
I
f there were any doubts about
the size of the megaphone
University
of
Michigan
football coach Jim Harbaugh wields
in his highly visible, $7-million-
dollars-per-year position, coverage
of his recent appearance at a local
pro-life event should put them to
rest. His comments were picked
up by a number of national news
outlets, including The New York
Times, The Washington Post, USA
Today, Inside Higher Ed and Sports
Illustrated. And, in the process,
they made their way to me, a U-M
alum living 800 miles away in
Rhode Island.
In case you missed it: On July 17,
Harbaugh was a keynote speaker,
alongside an ordained priest, at a
Plymouth Right to Life event about
20 miles outside of Ann Arbor. As
reported in Detroit Catholic, the
sold-out event was a fundraiser
for “pro-life initiatives in the
area.” Items for auction included
U-M football memorabilia and the
chance to catch a football tossed
across the event space by Harbaugh
himself, a privilege that apparently
sold for $2,300.
During his remarks, Harbaugh,
a Catholic, said that though he
generally believes that one person’s
moral
stance
shouldn’t
dictate
society’s laws, abortion falls in a
different category. “I believe in
having the courage to let the unborn
be born,” he said. “I love life. I
believe in having a loving care and
respect for life and death. My faith
and my science are what drive these
beliefs in me.”
At one point in his remarks, he
quoted from the Book of Jeremiah.
At another, he said, “In God’s plan,
each unborn human truly has a
future filled with potential, talent,
dreams and love … I have living
proof in my family, my children
and the many thousands that
I’ve coached that the unborn are
amazing gifts from God to make this
world a better place.”
There are a number of reasons
why these comments were so
disturbing. Foremost was the timing
of Harbaugh’s appearance.
Read more at michigandaily.com
Read more at michigandaily.com
THE MICHIGAN DAILY
SUMMER EDITORIAL BOARD
Read more at michigandaily.com
PHILIP EIL
U-M Alum