Unless you’ve been asleep or comatose for a year, you will know that the US is embroiled in a very contentious race for the White House. If we just want to focus on the issue of privacy and freedom of speech, to the exclusion of other issues, and you are an advocate of personal liberties, who would better serve you in the Oval Office- Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump? If the issue of privacy is important to you and might be the deciding factor in who you vote for, maybe you’ll find the following interesting and instructive.
Many see a Hillary Clinton presidency as an extension of Obama’s tenure. This is not good news for civil libertarians, because there has been regression of freedom under the Obama White House. Moreover, there have been more prosecutions of journalists and their sources than under all previous presidents combined. Hillary Clinton has been clinging closely to Obama’s coattails in running her campaign. While some may think this a calculated ploy, it certainly plays well with black voters who were a major reason for Obama’s being elected twice. And it is a constituency heavily courted by Hillary Clinton now.
Some might argue that Clinton’s embrace of Obama, regardless of a lackluster economy for eight years (for the first time, economic growth in the US never topped 3% in any year), the above referenced odious record on privacy issues, and his many feckless foreign policy missteps, might make her decision to cling to him a perilous one. But all you have to do is look at Obama’s comments in the spring, downplaying her email controversy, while there was an active, ongoing investigation by the FBI to know that the fix was afoot.
A compliant Clinton could help burnish his legacy. It is unconscionable for a president to try to influence a probe in this manner, but many feel that the verdict on Clinton was rendered from the White House -predetermined- as a quid pro quo for her approval of his presidency (BTW, in which she played a major role – for better or for worse).
Making matters worse is that is something pointed out in a USAToday opinion piece by Glenn Reynolds, a University of Tennesee law professor and USAToday contributor. According to him, the supposedly impartial press has bent over backwards to support Clinton and denigrate Donald Trump, and in the process throwing out the window even the appearance of neutrality and candor.
Reynolds, no lover of Trump, opines that he, given the incestuous ties of the civil service (read: FBI) and how they rolled over and covered for her to toe the party-line in the Clinton debacle, would not be beholding to the establishment/democratic civil-service and liberal-leaning mainstream media.
Both institutions, Reynolds believes, have gone into the tank for Hillary and Obama throughout his presidency and alludes to government employees as a ’’Democratic Party monoculture”. Obama apparently also set the IRS after the opposition Republicans in a move reminiscent of Richard Nixon’s infamous enemies list. Do we want more of the same?
Both institutions, Reynolds believes, have gone into the tank for Hillary and Obama throughout his presidency and he alludes to government employees as a ’’Democratic Party monoculture”. Obama apparently also set the IRS after opposition Republicans in a move reminiscent of Richard Nixon’s infamous enemies list. Do we want more of the same?
Reynolds maintains that a Clinton presidency would merely embolden a fawning, myopic press, thus endorsing their biases and continue their total disregard of the shabby, untoward treatment their journalist colleagues endured and continue to endure. True, Trump is an unknown and, goodness knows, he has his own baggage and shortcomings.
But the way the establishment has alternately isolated, debased and ignored him raises the hope that, maybe – just maybe, if he is elected a Trump administration won’t conduct business as usual in Washington. This is also why establishment Republicans are indifferent about Trump’s chances. If he wins, they might not be able to dip their beaks in the public trough so easily or frequently.
I think we know what we’ll get with a Clinton in the Oval Office and, given the last eight years of massive government surveillance and journalistic witch hunts, it isn’t very appealing. The future direction of privacy and civil liberties hang in the balance.
Editors comment: Stan’s views are his own, and should not be regarded as representing the views held by other BestVPN staff members.