By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The article details the story of Thomas Webster, a former police officer who was present at the January 6th Capitol riot. Webster, swayed by Donald Trump’s rhetoric and conspiracy theories about the 2020 election, drove to Washington, D.C. where he assaulted a police officer. Following his conviction, Webster was sentenced to prison, but was later pardoned by Trump. Despite the pardon, and now living in Mississippi, Webster still believes the election was stolen. The article concludes by highlighting Webster’s continued struggles with the events of that day and the difficulty in reconciling his actions with his self-perception as a patriot.
Read the original article here
Donald Trump wants you to forget that January 6 happened, but it’s not just that day he’d like swept under the rug. It seems like there’s a whole catalog of events and behaviors he’d prefer we collectively erase from our memory. It’s almost as if he’s trying to rewrite history, but some things are just too significant to simply vanish. The insurrection itself, with the violence at the Capitol, the intent to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power – that’s a cornerstone of what he likely wants us to forget.
The story of January 6, as told by those who were there, like Officer Daniel Hodges, and those who participated, like Thomas Webster, is a stark reminder of the division and the battles over truth. Hodges, tasked with protecting the very election Webster claimed was stolen, saw his physical and mental well-being take a hit. Webster, swayed by narratives, found himself in a prison cell years later. The contrast is palpable and highlights the two different paths people took on that day. It shows the danger of misinformation and the ease with which individuals can be led astray.
The fact that the country seemed briefly united in condemning the events, only to have that unity splinter into competing narratives, is also telling. The speed with which the story was re-framed, with Trump calling it “a day of love,” is a concerning tactic. This constant manipulation, this attempt to control the narrative, is a key part of the strategy to erase what happened. This is done to protect not only himself but those around him.
Beyond January 6, the list of things he would want people to forget is extensive. The Epstein files, the “fine people” comments, the allegations of sexual assault, the tax giveaways, the fraud charges – it goes on and on. Then there’s the handling of state secrets, the meeting with Putin in Helsinki, the impeachment, and the role of his associates in various scandals. It’s an almost exhausting litany of potential political and ethical missteps.
It seems clear that the events of January 6 are not the only things Trump wants us to forget. There’s a broader pattern of actions and statements that he might prefer to disappear. It suggests a desire to control the narrative and shape the historical record.
That January 6th, and everything else he’d likely prefer we forget, serves as a stark reminder of the importance of memory, critical thinking, and a willingness to confront uncomfortable truths. It is a cautionary tale about how easily a narrative can be manipulated and how important it is to be vigilant against such attempts.
Many people have expressed the frustration of feeling powerless in the face of this kind of manipulation. The sentiment that, “I care deeply but what does anyone want me to do?” is a very common one. The question of how to respond, how to counteract the efforts to rewrite history, is a valid one that likely many people have asked themselves. Voting, staying informed, and engaging in civil discussions are the most we can do.
The discussions about how difficult it is to change the minds of those who don’t agree with you also resonates. The point that, “most people don’t really care either, it’s just the 10-20% that are actually engaged with the world around them,” underscores a very real dynamic in today’s political climate. The struggle to remain focused and dedicated is a challenge many face, and some question what actions they can take.
The fact that the media landscape is also mentioned is not surprising, as it’s been the center of so many debates. It’s worth noting the concern that “the media is controlled by him anyway now,” and the idea that some news outlets are influenced by fear of retaliation.
The final sentiment offered, of a coming crisis and a world that might face significant challenges, is a dark but not unrealistic view of the current state of affairs. The idea that resources have been depleted and that there could be consequences, and the fact that nature will eventually claim even the most extravagant of human endeavors, is something to ponder.
In the end, even in a world where forces conspire to make us forget, the truth, and the need to remember, remains. We must remain vigilant, critical, and engaged in the struggle to shape our own history, not to let it be rewritten by those who seek to erase inconvenient truths.