THE FIVE TOP REASONS:
1. Section 230
President Trump has long called for abolishing or amending Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which grants internet companies key liability for the content that third parties publish on their platforms. Trump specifically called on Congress to strike down Section 230 in the NDAA, threatening to veto the bill without a Section 230 ban.
2. Renaming military bases
The NDAA includes a provision to rename military bases that bear the names of Confederate generals. President Trump has long opposed the campaign to strike Confederate statues and monuments from the public square, rightly arguing that the activists would move from Confederate monuments to monuments of America’s Founding Fathers (as repeatedly happened this summer).
3. Limiting the president’s use of military funds
Trump also faulted the NDAA for restricting “the President’s ability to preserve our Nation’s security by arbitrarily limiting the amount of military construction funds that can be used to respond to a national emergency. In a time when adversaries have the means to directly attack the homeland, the President must be able to safeguard the American people without having to wait for congressional authorization.”
4. Slowing the rollout of 5G
Trump also claimed that an amendment in the bill “would slow down the rollout of nationwide 5G, especially in rural areas.” The NDAA seems to involve two 5G-related provisions: a measure to “support the development of a 5G wireless network by establishing the Public Wireless Supply Chain Innovation Fund and the Multilateral Telecommunications Security Fund,” and a measure to reduce foreign influence in 5G — combatting the influence of Chinese technology.
5. Preventing Trump from bringing troops home
Finally, the president claimed that the NDAA restricts his ability to bring American troops home from overseas.
“Numerous provisions of the Act directly contradict my Administration’s foreign policy, particularly my efforts to bring our troops home,” Trump explained. “I oppose endless wars, as does the American public. Over bipartisan objections, however, this Act purports to restrict the President’s ability to withdraw troops from Afghanistan, Germany, and South Korea.”
Unconstitutional on its surface. The POTUS is CiC and can direct the forces anywhere except to war without congress putting its corrupt and heavily bribed self into it.