Staff Reports
Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland has decided to weigh in on President Trump’s recent pardons for those involved in the January 6 protests. According to Raskin, these pardons are part of a master plan to create a “reserve army of political foot soldiers.” This theory could put even the wildest conspiracy theorists to shame. Apparently, in the eyes of Raskin and his ilk, the only crime committed was that thousands of Americans dared to question the legitimacy of the 2020 election.
Raskin argued that pardons are typically reserved for individuals who are either innocent or victims of some kind of suggestion-based injustice. His implication is that the January 6 protesters, caught on tape swinging sticks and sporting flags, don’t meet these criteria. No doubt playing into the mainstream media’s narrative, he pointed to the guilty pleas and convictions of many of these individuals. It seems Raskin possesses a selective memory; crimes involving actual violence are highlighted while the underlying issues of election integrity are pushed under the rug.
Jamie Raskin: The question is, why are J6ers being released? Are they being released as a reserve army of foot soldiers to act on behalf of MAGA, and Donald Trump? 🤡
These people are insufferable rètarded. pic.twitter.com/2aHtTtQiLv
— Sara Rose 🇺🇸🌹 (@saras76) January 22, 2025
In his quest to spread this narrative, Raskin suggested that for a pardon to be warranted, a person should demonstrate they’ve reformed and no longer pose a risk to society. He seems to believe that anyone who dared to stand up for perceived injustices must have lifetime “criminal” status stamped across their forehead. Raskin’s sweeping generalizations might leave one to wonder if he believes that ever questioning the government should earn a permanent mark in the “thug” column.
The congressman also questioned the motives behind the pardons, inferring that they are nothing more than a way to build an army of MAGA supporters ready to act on Trump’s behalf. He paints a picture reminiscent of the dystopian futures one might find on the movie screen, with citizens mobilizing as pawns in a master plan. This hyperbolic rhetoric seems less about providing coherent policy analysis and more about tugging at heartstrings and whipping up fear in his constituents.
Raskin’s claims can easily be broken down into the absurd. Many Americans are starting to see through the theatrics, recognizing that standing up for one’s beliefs does not magically transform someone into a seditious conspirator. When citizens feel their voices aren’t heard and their votes go unacknowledged, it is hardly surprising that they take to the streets to express that frustration. The real question remains—why are Raskin and his allies so intent on alienating those who simply want a fair playing field?
