Said "a White House official," quoted in "Biden administration will leave it to Trump to implement TikTok ban/The ban goes into effect on Sunday unless the Supreme Court intervenes" (ABC News).
What's not clear, of course, is the position if there is no "American ownership." It is clear that at long last the Biden administration will be going. It did seem as though Biden might want to horn in on the role of TikTok savior, but no. It will leave this one to Trump (or the Supreme Court).
Speaking of the last moments, Bob Dylan joined TikTok a couple days ago, just in time to make fun of needing to go:
@bobdylan Replying to @jo ♬ original sound - Bob Dylan
Posts
25 comments:
Forcing a sale almost seems worse to me than banning it outright. There's something about it that just feels thuggish.
China likes to dish it out, it’s past time they be served a tasty helping.
It's not China getting served, it is the free speech rights of Americans.
I don't understand the national security threat posed by TikTok. It's not as if our NSA isn't already hoovering up all our data. It's not as if one social media app is collecting info that can't already be bought on the dark market.
I'm not buying the US government's argument about the need for this move.
Thuggish? Read this about the South China Sea:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine-dash_line
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_disputes_in_the_South_China_Sea
Chinese fishing boat bullies:
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1613538/chinese-captain-killed-during-fishing-clash-s-korea-coastguard
The answer is not to excuse China, rather, we should update the NSA's mission and stop creepy East German-style spying everywhere.
Agree, Mary Beth. This doesn't seem like an American solution to the problem. It seems like a three card monty to distract us from what our own NSA is doing.
Yes, that’s what the Chinese would have you believe.
I'm happily tik tok free, but then, I also don't own a cell phone! (happily!!)
So Biden actively pushed for the sale/ban law, deliberately set the sale date to be the day before inauguration (and over a holiday weekend), and then decided to punt on it rather than follow through? That's some great leadership right there...
Wow, I'm surprised to hear "American ownership" is required. I guess I wasn't paying attention. I assumed it was about getting it out of Chinese control where the Party has unfettered access to the data. Does the law actually say "American ownership"? If it becomes a public company based in Bermuda, is that still "American"? Or is the White House official an idiot?
Nothing tells me this a serious security concern like punting it to later for someone else to deal with.
Hey, Biden leads by napping as someone moves his hand to sign documents. Don't knock it until you try it! It's great for work-life balance.
His backroom handlers are split between (1) throwing out every marginal idea they were too timid to execute before the election, and (2) bending down to Trump to avoid his wrath.
under Kelo, couldn't the government just TAKE IT, as Eminent Domain ?
and pay them "the fair market price", as determined BY the government?
Doesn't the government OWN the means of production?
AREN'T we a marxist state?
THe ADL and Israel did not like the Pro-Hamas anti-Genocide stuff that showed up on Tik-Tok. Nor does the Uniparty or the Left like the fact that the Chinese owners have refused to cooperate with DHS/FBI/NGO censorship requests.
That's why they need USA owners. So, they can censor.
Ah, so (as always with you) it is the Jews. Shameful.
Again, it seems there is no danger of being exposed to a reasoned argument that clearly states the stakes, the interests, and what is to be gained or lost. Whenever the subject comes up, the energy is dissipated by a patchwork quilt of arguments, some of them silly and unserious, some of them fatalistic. But none of them makes any headway getting to the heart of the matter, and the discussion withers on the vine yet again.
One must conclude there is a reason to not get to the heart of the matter, since that is the only objective that seems to be consistently satisfied with each round. One cannot conclude whether that is a benefit, or a present danger. What if it's a present danger?
We know American companies would never partner with a corrupt government to stifle the people's 1st Amendment rights, right Zuckerberg?
It's the Biden Administration that is giving out 'American Ownership', it's not what the law states.
"The law gives the Justice Department the power to pursue fines of up to $5,000 per user, an enormous potential liability given the app's popularity.
So even if President Joe Biden -- or President-elect Donald Trump -- say they won't enforce the ban, tech companies will still be liable as long as TikTok is owned by ByteDance...."
Maybe the Jan 6th 'arrest any republican in DC' campaign was just a warm-up and flex for the DOJ.
‘Freedom just around the corner for you. But with truth so far off, what good will it do?’ ~ Bob Dylan
You clearly didn't read the decision, RC.
Kak plays “skin flute”. Film at 11.
Shouldn't there be some degree of reciprocity between the rights of Americans and Chinese to have access to the propaganda and private data of each other's peoples?
If we could have the opportunity to reach the Chinese people with the true story of their present and coming woes, they should have a comparable opportunity.
Shakespeare quote of the week: (for Iman while he pleasures Trump)
“Let me lick thy shoe."
The Tempest
Funny how talk about the TikTok ban took off once it was discovered that the Under 25 crowd was getting the majority of their news about Gaza from influencers on the app.
Post a Comment