What is Trump's stance on privacy?

Privacy Questions
1

I know many would like to avoid US politics, but I thought it woukd be interesting to know GOP and Trump positiion, now that they control the presidency, senate and perhaps the house.

2 Likes
2

Disappointing but somehow I’m not surprised. I am very glad I do not live in the U.S.A.

5 Likes
3

nevermind… Associated Press News has now called the election for Trump.

4

I am no expert in US politics but wasn’t presidency for congress? (a Trump win is extremely likely it isn’t a done deal yet).
Edit:
To answer the OP, I remember Trump renewing a part of the Surveillance Act, and the Republicans seemed inclined to re-authorize the FISA.
Given Trump promised mass-deportations, I would guess that it means heavy monitoring/surveillance as well.

2 Likes
5

This would be speculation.

The real question is how will his privacy stance from last time would change (I’ve no idea what was his last stance on privacy like last term though).

1 Like
6

I also remember reublicans this time reauthorising FISA for two years only, in hopes that Trump will get rid of it. Was it just a pretext?

1 Like
7

Not great. As some have already mentioned, he reauthorized FISA and warrantless surveillance. But for those of you who may be non-Americans not familiar with our politics, in terms of privacy, there was really no great answers no matter where you look. There isn’t some bold opposition to privacy encroachment in the democratic party. Speaking as a non-partisan (I don’t vote), it does appear the GOP leans slightly more into the idea of these surveillance programs, however the democrats don’t really care enough to do anything about them. You’d have to look to 3rd party candidates before better solutions start presenting themselves, and independents and libertarians are basically a joke when it comes to political campaigns. 3rd party candidates never win, and likely never will.

Edit: 3rd party candidate aren’t even allowed to debate the two main parties on stage.

3 Likes
8

This article addresses how Trump—but really any president—could leverage US surveillance for his goals.

2 Likes
9

Interesting.

“Administrations from both parties have invoked the term ‘national security’ and have used national security loopholes to justify surveillance and profiling,” says Patrick Toomey, deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project. “

What happened to US democracy? Burried by the Patriot Act?

1 Like
10

Yup. Government unilaterally wants more data, not less, and privacy prevention has to be pushed from the ground up. Sadly tech privacy and security aren’t as focused as it’s more complicated than say something like CCTV, which is easier to understand for the masses. It’s a rough political fight anyway, especially with the whattaboutism around it.

1 Like
11

I would argue it was much earlier than that. Focusing on purely the surveillance aspect, the establishment of the CIA as a permanent government agency would probably be it. You can watch this video by Johnny Harris. The TL;DR is that at the time intelligence agencies like the OSS were created for wartime and subsequently disbanned. Why? Because it was inevitable that they would have too much, largely unchecked power and could/would be used against the people much like the Gestapo.

4 Likes
12

Well he signed that thing with Elon as the promoter for “free speech”, so there is that.

13

In addition to acts like this, it is also the bureaucracy that surrounds it. US intelligence apparatus has superseded the democratic establishment with its overreach. Any politician who wishes to get anywhere near privacy and intelligence is taken to a single meeting with top intelligence brass, shown the fear of foreign intelligence attacks, and thus discouraged from advocating for privacy.

Here is the most recent example: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4589152-speakership-turns-johnson-from-fisa-critic-to-champion/

When it comes to national security and intelligence, bureaucracy reigns supreme over democratically elected leaders.

2 Likes
14

Thanks. Johnny is a real hero with real curiosity and not blinded by partisanship. I looked up and only ,1 Senator opposed the Patriot Act(Russ Feingold).

15

It’s always the unelected appointees that cause the most problems.

1 Like
16

These things didn’t make it to mainstream media much last time around, but I want to share them because they will most likely come back, especially in the context of the proposed “mass deportations”:

  1. The State Department was requesting persons seeking a visa to come to the US to give them all their social media handles. I know several people who were interviewed in consulates in those years, and they were specifically asked about anti Trump postings in social media from visa applicants. Visas of those persons would be denied: The Many Problems With the Trump Administration’s Plan to Hold on to Some Immigrants’ Social Media Posts | ACLU and Timeline of Social Media Monitoring for Vetting by the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department | Brennan Center for Justice .
  2. Immigration attorneys were also targeted at border ports of entry: Documents Show Trump Officials Used Secret Terrorism Unit to Question Lawyers at the Border — ProPublica Given that immigration attorneys have become targets for extremists in several countries across the world, I’m pretty sure that there will be efforts to target lawyers now as well. New Report Details Threats to Immigration Lawyers in Britain - Human Rights First

And now, he’s got Musk on his side, who I would think will not be too opposed to provide Twitter / X data of “far left users” to the government upon request.

1 Like
17

We will likely see further deregulation allowing corporations to run wild as well. For example:

18

Silly question. Sorry, but let’s face it you’re asking what a cult of personality thinks. It’s all about Trump. He has no real political views. He’s the ultimate plutocrat, despite all the bullshit about the working class. Trump wants what’s best for Trump, and barely reads. He’s not curious about anything other than himself. He has no views, and if he did they would change 5 minutes later after someone else talks to him. He doesn’t care and wouldn’t understand the topic. That’s the truth of the matter. We are all on our own here and have to protect ourselves.

8 Likes
19

Normally the promises that the GOP made with Trump got real in 2017-2020. By that standard, the Trump team will chase for journalists in 2025-2028 that criticized him or the GOP.

“We will go out and find the conspirators, not just in government but in the media,” Mr. Patel said. “Yes, we’re going to come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections — we’re going to come after you. Whether it’s criminally or civilly, we’ll figure that out.” He added: “We’re actually going to use the Constitution to prosecute them for crimes they said we have always been guilty of but never have.”

Meaning more surveillance in my view.

1 Like
20

The issue isn’t just him, it is also going to be the people he appoints to positions of power.

5 Likes