Editorial: The fate of the Trump presidency is a far greater issue than one election lacking integrity; Trump, others have challenged our entire acceptance of the political establishment

Editorial: The fate of the Trump presidency is a far greater issue than one election lacking integrity; Trump, others have challenged our entire acceptance of the political establishment

Kelli Ann Cook, Publisher

A companion article, which The Golden Hammer published today by Pulitzer-Prize-winning journalist Glenn Greenwald, makes some important points about American society in 2021:

“Persecution is not typically doled out to those who recite mainstream pieties, or refrain from posing meaningful threats to those who wield institutional power, or obediently stay within the lines of permissible speech and activism imposed by the ruling class.

“Those who render themselves acquiescent and harmless that way will — in every society, including the most repressive — usually be free of reprisals. They will not be censored or jailed. They will be permitted to live their lives largely unmolested by authorities, while many will be well-rewarded for this servitude. Such individuals will see themselves as free because, in a sense, they are: they are free to submit, conform and acquiesce.

“Whether a society is truly free is determined by how it treats its dissidents, those who live and speak and think outside of permissible lines, those who effectively subvert ruling class aims.”

Individuals who live outside of the permissible lines of the ruling class often are the subjects of persecution, precisely because they pose meaningful threats to those who wield institutional power.

In recent days, Americans, Texans, and Montgomery County residents have witnessed precisely such persecution to people who pose meaningful threats.

America’s persecution

On the grandest scale, Americans have witnessed persecution of a President of the United States who posed a meaningful threat to the institutional power of the political establishment. It’s no mystery that Donald Trump gained support over the past four years from Hispanic voters, from African-American voters, and from others who fall outside of the established institutional leadership. He gained that support, because his administration showed respect and a willingness to provide economic opportunities even to those individuals outside of the institutional mainstream.

President Trump challenged the institutional power of the “mainstream” media, social media, the education establishment, and even the religious establishment. Therefore, it’s no surprise that those institutions wielded vast power to do everything they could to remove him from the White House.

Reform requires a willingness to challenge the way things are. President Trump challenged the establishment both among Democrats and among Republicans. The few members of the United States Senate and of the House of Representatives who are willing to question the integrity of the 2020 election are the same individuals who refuse to stay within the lines of permissible activism within Congress’ ruling class. They will fail in their challenge of the determined outcome of the Presidential Election.

There’s a big difference between the Bush challenge in 2000 and the Trump challenge in 2020. Governor Bush was the political establishment, so the judiciary sided with him. That’s the society we have become where the judiciary is just as hyper-political as other major American institutions. President Trump is an affront to institutional power including the power of the judiciary.

Only by addressing the corruption of those institutions – the judiciary, public education, the media, and even churches – will true friends of liberty ever prevail in their centuries-long ideological battle.

Texas’ persecution

In 2014, Texans in north Texas District 16 elected businessman Don Huffines to the Texas Senate. Huffines, a brilliant speaker with one of the most conservative voting records in the history of the Texas Senate, fought against the political establishment, taxing entities, in a way which just hit too close to home for them.

In 2017, Huffines introduced legislation to require a 30 percent voter turnout for any bond election in Texas to gain approval. Rarely do more than 10 percent of voters participate in bond elections, a fact which favors school districts and other taxing entities with a large number of employees and boosters. The San Antonio Express-News claimed that if Huffines’ bill were to become law, the result would be “effectively putting most taxing entities out of the bond business. The consequences could be devastating for cash-strapped school districts in need of new facilities.”

Huffines lost his Senate seat to a Democrat in 2018 after the local Republican establishment determined Huffines should only receive tepid support in his re-election bid. Huffines posed too much of a meaningful threat to the institutional power of the political establishment.

Similarly, look at the poor showing of Shelley Luther, an enormously popular candidate who challenged the political establishment in her bid to win a Texas Senate seat in Special Election in September. Luther came in first place in a crowed field of six candidates but lost a Republican Runoff Election by an immense margin after Governor Greg Abbott and the political establishment lined up behind her electoral opponent.

Montgomery County’s persecution

The political establishment in Montgomery County is very similar. With local newspaper backing, the establishment has taken tight control of the Montgomery County Commissioners Court (where the lone conservative is Commissioner James Noack) and the County government which it oversees.

Conservative reformers have done well in primary elections, such as the electoral contests involving Greg Parker, who ran for Precinct 2 Commissioner in 2018, Ike Fluellen, who ran for Precinct 2 Constable in 2016, and Mark Bosma, who ran for County Judge in 2014. The political establishment soundly defeated all three of those candidates in Republican Runoff Elections, which resembled persecutions far more closely than they did elections.

Conclusion

Election integrity is not the only issue preventing true reform of government spending and overreach. Rather, the unwillingness of Americans, Texans, and local citizens to address the institutional culprits of the destruction of liberty is the core problem.

Comments

comments

You must be logged in to post a comment Login