Public Doesn't Believe Obama Wiretapped Trump

Donald Trump refuses to back off his accusation (i.e., LIE) that President Obama wiretapped him during/after the 2016 campaign. He sticks to that lie even though FBI Director Comey, the Justice Department, and our intelligence agencies say there is no proof that it happened.

But he needs to drop that accusation, and admit he was wrong. That's because the American people, by a huge margin, don't believe it happened. Two-thirds of the public (66%) think he was NOT wiretapped by Obama, while only one-third (34%) think it did happen. By continuing to lie about this, Trump is just further destroying his credibility with the American people.

These results are from the recent Harvard / Harris Poll done between March 14th and 16th of a random national sample of 2,092 registered voters. (No margin of error was given)

Public Doesn't Believe Trump's Wiretapping Allegation

Donald Trump (and his administration flunkies) have told well over 100 verifiable lies in the less than two months he has been in office. It should come as no surprise then that the public doesn't believe his latest allegation (lie) -- that President Obama wiretapped Trump Tower during the presidential campaign.

Only 29% of the public says they believe Trump administration officials about the wiretapping, while 46% say they believe the denials of Obama administration officials -- a difference of 17 points. And only 30% of the public says the wiretapping was ordered by Obama, while half of the population (50%) say it did not happen -- a 20 point difference.Republicans may be willing to swallow Trump's lies, but most Americans aren't that gullible.

Trump's dishonesty (among other things) is why his job approval rating remains upside-down.

These charts are from a new Economist / YouGov Poll -- done on March 6th and 7th of a random national sample of 1,500 adults (including 1,359 registered voters), with a margin of error of 3.4 points.

Warrantless Wiretapping Ruled Unconstitutional

Thank goodness the courts have finally made a ruling on the constitutionality of wiretapping without a duly authorized search warrant. When our Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution, they were aware of the awesome power of government and the ability of government to interfere in the affairs of private citizens. That is why they made sure that government must show probable cause and obtain a search warrant before violating the privacy of ordinary people.

George Bush evidently didn't read that part of the Constitution, because he decided he didn't have to follow it. Shortly after 9/11, he (with the backing of Congress) authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on people (including U.S. citizens) without getting a search warrant. He cited national security as a concern in doing this.

Soon after, the government declared the muslim charity, the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, to be a supporter of terrorism. They then used that declaration to wiretap the phone calls between the charity and it's two American lawyers -- without getting a search warrant. After gathering evidence of the wiretapping, the victims filed suit against the federal government in 2006.

On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker ruled on the case. He ruled that the victims had shown they had been subjected to warrantless wiretapping, and that the wiretapping was illegal under U.S. constitutional law. Although his ruling was on the issue of this one case, it could have a much broader effect.

The plaintiff's attorney, Jon Eisenberg, said, "By virtue of finding what the Bush administration did to our clients was illegal, he found that the Terrorist Surveillance Program was unlawful."

Sadly, the Obama administration had asked the judge to dismiss the case by invoking the state secrets privilege. Attorney General Holder had claimed the lawsuit might expose ongoing intelligence work. I must admit that argument is troubling, because it infers that the current administration is also violating the Constitution in the same way. Fortunately the judge didn't buy that specious argument. The government has not decided whether to appeal.

The plaintiffs had asked for $1 million each in damages. The judge has decided to hear more arguments before deciding on any damages.

I applaud the judge's brave and wise decision. The requirement to get a search warrant before violating the privacy of a person is one of our most important protections (along with habeas corpus and free speech) against government tyranny.

(The picture above depicts the signing of the Constitution.)

Obama Would Continue "Patriot Act"

A few years ago, the Bush administration used America's fear of terrorism to push through Congress the Patriot Act. This misnamed law had nothing to do with patriotism, but was instead one of the most far-reaching destruction of individual rights this country has ever seen. It gave the federal government the right to eavesdrop on Americans and seize records without ever having to apply for and justify a search warrant.

When the law was passed, I thought it was unconstitutional, and I still believe that. Our Founding Fathers knew how oppressive and intrusive government could be. That's why they made search warrants a constitutional requirement before government could snoop into the correspondence or records of private citizens.

I had hoped that one of the things President Obama would do upon coming into office would be to restore the individual rights taken from Americans through the Patriot Act. It looks like that hope will soon be dashed. Three provisions of the Patriot Act will soon expire, and the Obama administration has said it will ask that those provisions be extended.

One of the provisions gives the government the right to seize "business records" without a warrant. This is slightly misnamed, since it really applies to all of a person's records right down to the library books they read. There is no reason for this provision to exist. The government should have to apply for and justify issuance of a search warrant before seizing any kind of records from an individual citizen or organization.

The other two provisions regard the governments ability to use wiretaps without getting a search warrant first. These provisions can even be used when the individual has no known connections to terrorists or foreign governments or groups (in other words, it can apply to any American the government singles out -- without any probable cause and regardless of how innocent they may be).

It was wrong for the Bush administration to pass these laws, and it is just as wrong for the Obama administration to try to extend them into the future. This is not a Republican or Democratic issue. It is an issue of restoring the individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution to every American.

Not a single provision of this bad law should be extended. In fact, every single provision of the Patriot Act should be extinguished as soon as possible.