Posted on 01/18/2025 12:52:12 AM PST by RandFan
Dismayed by the amount of support the TikTok Ban is getting and a Unanimous decision by the men and women in black robes further alarms me and will just embolden the Feds and Congress to engage in more online censorship.
How come some (most?) Freepers don't see this? Are you still watching the networks and believing the foreign entity stuff?
You understand that the legislation is broader than that?
How did the tiktok ban idea get started anyway. Trump may have iniated it in his first term, I’m afraid…
Chinese Intelligence has immediate access and collection through their 2017 Intel law and subsequent legal acts. Its why military recruiters, the DOD, and then the government first dropped bans years ago.
The military wanted it first.
Chinese Intelligence has immediate access and collection through their 2017 Intel law and subsequent legal acts. Its why military recruiters, the DOD, and then the government first
We don’t need to assist them through their own program.
Yes it’s good he won, we have a reprieve but realize a future Admin. can abuse this law. It ALWAYS happens!
I’m going to author a porn version. My working name for it will be Dik Dok.
Unfortunately, you’re right on that point.
Liberals are anarcho-communists. A little big of realistic regulation means getting total control to the liberal.
You and I think the same on this. Trump's victory, while amazing and wonderful, is merely a four-year pause.
I'll take it.
ok. if this amounts entirely to our crappy tyrannical uniparty gov’t again striking directly at free speech then i’m with you. i’m going to reserve a hearing for Thomas and Alito though as i respect their juris prudence.
otherwise, i’m very close to being a free-speech absolutist among voting age citizens/adults. at a minimum there has to be built in protection from moral harm and full parental consent for any content available for children or dependents however.
You raise a good point no one covers themselves in glory as far as I’m concerned
Trump is (now) trying to find a solution but they really “boxed” him in on this with the Jan 19 date, it’s also an act of Congress.
Little he can do but sympathize with the huge amount of complaints coming next week
That’s what I think he knows and why he’s now talking about solutions.
“public square social media site.”
You actually answered your own question with this statement. The issue of free speech does not come in to play for the platform it’s self. It applies to the U.S. citizen users of that platform. They have free speech rights as long as TikTok provides them an open public square to exercise that right. So the whole issue is not actually about suppressing TikTok the company. It is about suppressing the rights of those who use the platform including U.S. businesses who advertise there.
This is greatly going to impact U.S. businesses and put a dent in the economy. It is going to harm us much more than it is going to harm China. And there is absolutely nothing on TikTok that China cannot get from any other forward facing public platforms who are also collecting private data and selling it. It is ignorant to even think this is going to make one bit of difference to China.
He cleverly elevated Vance which gives the potential for some longevity
And I trust and like both.
thanks for that. i tend to agree.
so then why did the uniparty pass the ban? and why did the USSC uphold it?
They will twist it and apply that law in other areas when opportunity arises.
If it was just tiktok it could have been a one line bill
But it wasn’t and you should know what the US CONgress is like
That law will come back and haunt us like so many others. In my opinion of course...
(2) Controlled by a foreign adversaryThe term "controlled by a foreign adversary" means, with respect to an individual or entity, that such individual or entity is-
(A) a foreign person that is domiciled in, is headquartered in, has its principal place of business in, or is organized under the laws of a foreign adversary country;
(B) an entity with respect to which a foreign person or combination of foreign persons described in subparagraph (A) directly or indirectly own at least a 20 percent stake; or
(C) a person subject to the direction or control of a foreign person or entity described in subparagraph (A) or (B).
“so then why did the uniparty pass the ban? and why did the USSC uphold it?”
Because it is not about TikTok. They knew all this fact before they even drafted the bill. It is about incrementally getting government control over the internet. They did the exact same thing with the Patriot Act. They used it to gain more control over the people.
We have to remember that governments true intentions and goals are NEVER what they say they are. Somewhere there is always a Trojan Horse in the language of the bill that screws the people and hands them even more power over the people.
All these definitions can be twisted and it happens all the time
If it was truly about tiktok then why this law and not a one line bill ? Think please.
What Trump has gone through these last 8 years with contorted definitions under Foreign Intelligence acts and God knows what else I would have thought more Freepers would be clued up
Evidently not........
FR is unlikely to fall under the control of/be purchased by a “foreign adversary nation”...so no the “TikTok law” cannot be used to censor FR:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521/text
https://codes.findlaw.com/us/title-10-armed-forces/10-usc-sect-4872/
Current “foreign adversary nations”: North Korea, the People’s Republic of China, Russian Federation and the Islamic Republic of Iran.
I’m glad your saying these things as well. Actually, there’s more skeptical than I thought.
That ruling was awful
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.