I think a lot things are simultaneously true: 1. He exaggerated/lied about some of his accomplishments and aspects of his life. 2. The accomplishments and aspe

I think a lot things are simultaneously true: 1. He exaggerated/lied about some of his accomplishments and aspects of his life. 2. The accomplishments and aspects of his life he exaggerated/lied about did not seem to be about his academic success. Generic life puffery that, while dishonest, did not make him unqualified for his position. 3. Anti-DEI crusaders decided to make an example of him. 4. Had he not been a person of color, the scrutiny would have had a very different shape.