Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton may be on the opposite sides of the political spectrum, but they are both the same when it comes to violating your right to privacy. The right to be secure in your person and effects is one of our most important rights, enshrined in the Constitution, and cannot be violated in the pursuit of false security. Yet both major party candidates support the government spying on you.
Donald Trump sides with Hillary Clinton when it comes to the Patriot Act and NSA spying. In an interview with Hugh Hewitt back in December, he said he tends to “err on the side of security” and cited the Paris attacks as one of the reasons why. However, mass surveillance was put into place in France after the Charlie Hebdo attacks. These measures were much more invasive than the United States and, yet, failed to stop the attacks.
Hillary Clinton called for more surveillance in the wake of the Belgium attacks. She doesn’t regret voting for the Patriot Act when she was a U.S. Senator, and she advocates for the very same measures as Donald Trump when it comes to mass surveillance.
Out of the two, Donald Trump is the worse, but that isn’t saying much. Even though Trump advocates for spying on mosques in clear violation of the 4th Amendment, both candidates are for shutting down parts of the internet. Advocating for this kind of control over the internet is giving into fear and violating both the 1st Amendment, freedom of speech, and the 4th Amendment’s protection against unreasonable search and seizure.
Mass surveillance doesn’t work; it is nothing but security theater, meant to make you and I feel safe. There isn’t a single credible argument out there that can make the case tjat collecting your records and violating your privacy makes you safer.
The White House couldn’t point to a single case where the bulk collection of phone data thwarted a terrorist attack. An analysis done by the New American Foundation also found that the bulk collection of phone records by the NSA “has had no discernible impact on preventing acts of terrorism.” Even the FBI can’t point to a single case where the NSA’s bulk collection of phone records.
Just four months ago, the Republicans had a candidate who was on the side of liberty.
Rand Paul has fought for your right to be left alone, helping to cause the Patriot Act to expire ushering in surveillance reforms. He should have been the GOP nominee, a man who stands for individual liberty, and not Donald Trump.
Fortunately for liberty lovers, there is still one candidate out there who is opposed to mass surveillance. Gary Johnson is the Libertarian Party nominee and is an unabashed critic of mass surveillance. He will be the only third-party candidate on the ballot in all fifty states.
If you love liberty and the Constitution, then defend them and don’t vote for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.