TikTok Says the Trump Administration Has Forgotten About Trying To Ban it, Would Like To Know What's Up (theverge.com) 138
TikTok has filed a petition in a US Court of Appeals calling for a review of actions by the Trump administration's Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). The reason, according to the company, is that it hasn't heard from the committee in weeks about an imminent deadline for parent company ByteDance to sell off US assets over national security concerns. From a report: The CFIUS set the deadline of November 12th for TikTok to divest itself of "any tangible or intangible assets or property, wherever located, used to enable or support ByteDance's operation of the TikTok application in the United States." TikTok says it applied for a 30-day extension that was allowed for in the CFIUS' order, but hasn't received any communication on the matter. It's not clear what would actually happen if the deadline passed; TikTok was granted a preliminary injunction against it late last month.
that's what happens (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
"when politicians do things not because they mean it but because they want more votes"
Not that they not also have the attention span of a gnat.
Re: (Score:3)
Not that they not also have the attention span of a gnat.
I have the attention span of a gnat, too. That's why I'm now googling 'attention span of a gnat' which, it turns out, is a not-insignficant 0.210005 of a second!
Re: (Score:3)
I guess so... since the election is over and Trump's administration will be out of those offices come January 20; it would be a pointless exercise for them to pursue the TikTok charade any further.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean, whenever politicians do things?
tiktok no longer politically expedient (Score:5, Insightful)
trying to get the American populace to buy into a collective delusion is project du jour
Donald Trump full of shit? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Trump promised to drain the swamp. He just didn't clarify it was into a blender to make shit slushies. But to use an old saying -- whose the fool, the fool or the fool who follows...
Re:Donald Trump full of shit? (Score:5, Funny)
Trump promised to drain the swamp. He just didn't clarify it was into a blender to make shit slushies.
He had to drain the existing swamp to make room for a new, bigger, better one -- he is a real-estate developer after all. /sarcasm
I am sorry our president is occupied. (Score:5, Insightful)
He is currently in the middle of having a Temper Tantrum, because he Lost the Elections. Unlike previous presidents who had lost, but they stilled cared for America, worked to make sure the transition was seamless and smooth. Our current president is trying to see how much damage he can do before he leaves.
TicTok is no longer a priority, because he is too busy firing people who is trying their best to keep America Running, and working on a graceful transition for next year.
Re: (Score:3)
I cannot be the only person who finds this notion mildly frightening, because until January 20th, this man still does have control over the USA's nuclear launch codes.
Re: (Score:2)
Surely he can't fire them all by himself.
(does he even know how the control box works?)
Re: I am sorry our president is occupied. (Score:2)
He can, basically. The level of autonomy the POTUS has over the nuclear arsenal is frightening.
Re: (Score:2)
He can deliver the codes to the military folks that actually pull the trigger, but he's not carrying around a big red "nuke everyone" button in that briefcase. I would hope the military leadership would have standing orders that we check if there's a valid reason to launch before going live with it at this point. Especially with how erratic the shit-stirrer in chief has been over the last four years.
I don't doubt there's a level above zero percent that this could happen, but I still see it as a fairly min
Re: (Score:3)
You mean... outside? But that's where COVID-19 lives!
Re: (Score:2)
Ideally, there aren't even that many people that are willing to follow through with such a command, but can you confidently say that there are not?
Re: I am sorry our president is occupied. (Score:2)
Uh esper was fired and the second in line to esper quit. Now you have yes men. You donâ(TM)t need to launch, just instruct your yes men to not take orders from congress. January is going to be interesting
Re: I am sorry our president is occupied. (Score:5, Informative)
LOL, you people are delusional. The POTUS can't initiate a nuclear attack on his/her own. Crawl out of your prepper holes and get some fresh air.
Oddly enough, yes they can. NPR had a story about someone who was involved in the process (I think they were a missileer) and asked the question: who can stop the president from launching a nuclear strike?
The answer? There was no answer which means the answer is no one. Yes, there are some checks which will take place if such an order is given, but on the whole, if a president wants to launch an attack the order must be followed.
During the interview, the story was related that near the end of the Nixon presidency, his Chief of Staff (I think) told the Joint Chiefs that should Nixon give an order to launch, they were to check with him first. That is how concerned they were about Nixon's unbalanced mental state that he might do something like this.
I wish I could find that interview. It was great to listen to examples from our history about how the launch sequence came into effect and how it's evolved over time. For example, when Truman took over after FDR's death, the military more or less told him, "We have this super weapon and we're going to use. Just letting you know." The first bomb was dropped and Truman made his speech. Unbeknownst to him, the military had the second bomb and never really told him they were going to use it as well. They just did. That is what got the conversation going that nuclear weapons should not be under the control of the military but under the authority of the president.
P.S. Another tidbit from the story, when the first attempt at preventing the military from using nuclear weapons on its own were first developed, the process was to decouple the nuclear portion from the bomb itself. The nuclear pieces were kept in one location, under the control of the president, separate from the bomb, which was under the military's control. If the bomb would be needed, the nuclear parts would be transported under armed guard to the bomb's location and inserted into the bomb then armed. As nuclear weapons shrank in size, it no longer became feasible to perform this process which is why the entire weapon was removed from military control.
Re: I am sorry our president is occupied. (Score:4, Informative)
Is the the story you're remembering? A Radiolab episode from 2017. As I remember, the checks were put in place to keep the military from being able to launch without civilian oversight. But they want to be able to launch FAST, so the system is set up to have the President have the power to do it. Crazy it seems but no, if appears there is nothing from stopping the President from doing a launch.
Radiolab [wnycstudios.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Yes! That's the one! Thank you! It was replayed back in September/October. All I could remember is it was on NPR, not that it was part of the Radiolab show.
Everyone should listen to it, especially since the interview is done with someone who was part of the process and asked the question about whether or not you could refuse the order to launch.
Re: I am sorry our president is occupied. (Score:5, Interesting)
I think you may be confusing "initiate" with "carry out". The president can't *carry out* a nuclear attack on his own. Orders have to be relayed down the chain of command, all the way down to officers in silos and submarines who have direct control over the weapons.
But the president absolutely can *initiate* a nuclear attack. The so-called "football" is a briefcase with encrypted communication gear and a binder full of pre-arranged attack scenarios. The president selects an attack plan, and then orders the attack on the comm gear, authenticating himself with cryptographic credentials printed on a plastic card called "the biscuit" which he's supposed to have on his person at all times. This is a kind of two-factor authentication; you have to have both the football and the biscuit to launch a nuclear attack or confirm a nuclear attack order that goes through different channels. Bill Clinton famously misplaced his biscuit, leaving the United States incapable of launching a nuclear attack for several months, although nobody but him knew it at the time.
Once the president sends the order from the football, the trigger has been pulled. He has a five minute window to rescind his order, after which Air Force missiles will start launching; ten minutes later submarines will be firing. The whole system was designed for a Cold War "use-it-or-lose-it" scenario where Soviets would try to take out our nuclear deterrent with a first strike. It emphasizes speed over safety. There is no provision for officers in the chain of command to conduct a policy review or to ponder the sanity of the order; all they do is check that the order from their superior has been authenticated and then they relay the order down.
This makes the President and his entourage a single point of failure. Anyone with access to the football and the the biscuit can pull the nuclear trigger.
Personally, I don't think Trump is apt to do anything with his nuclear strike powers. Despite the militaristic posturing he doesn't fetishize the military like his base does; to him they're suckers to be used. What he values is the leverage and status they give him. In an extremely roundabout way, that's the best thing about him as a leader. Take Iran; actual war with them doesn't interest Trump the way it does John Bolton. Trump wants to force them to the table to accept a lopsided deal, which if he could do, would actually be a good thing.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a kind of two-factor authentication; you have to have both the football and the biscuit to launch a nuclear attack or confirm a nuclear attack order that goes through different channels. Bill Clinton famously misplaced his biscuit, leaving the United States incapable of launching a nuclear attack for several months, although nobody but him knew it at the time.
Whew. We're safe then. Somebody gave Donald Trump a biscuit. He no doubt ate it.
On a more serious note, if no one is verifying the President actually has the biscuit, we can be sure Trump has no idea where it is, and even more sure that he paid no attention whatsoever during the briefing about how to use it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was not aware that it was only one layer removed... I thought there were a couple of layers of indirection to get to the actual missile launches If the president can directly order strikes, then that's just one person away!
I was further unaware that they are under threat of death to follow those orders. I thought they could only be terminated and the next person fulfills the duties.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I am sorry our president is occupied. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not worried too much about nuclear launch codes, as I feel there are some safeguards to prevent him from firing them off for no good reason. But for a man in debt or a man who just wants to build his wealth, I wonder what our national secrets are worth to the highest bidder. Hopefully we can rely on Trump barely knowing how to read and not having the memory necessary to give detailed enough information in exchange for building permits abroad.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Only mildly frightening? He can still break so much that Biden needs to spend the coming four years fixing all that.
Re: (Score:3)
What happened to the President-elect Trump that said "I want to be a President for all americans, not just the ones who voted for me." ... yeah, he probably fired that speech writer.
Re:I am sorry our president is occupied. (Score:5, Insightful)
Same thing that happened to the candidate Trump who said, that unlike Obama, he would be too busy to play golf.
Re: (Score:3)
What happened to the President-elect Trump that said "I want to be a President for all americans, not just the ones who voted for me." ... yeah, he probably fired that speech writer.
Pretty sure that person never existed, since the quote you just gave is—with "support me in this election" in place of "voted for me"—something said verbatim by his opponent in her final campaign ad for the 2016 election [time.com]. In searching around for the last several minutes, I can't find any significant portion of that quote attributable to Trump. In fact, my recollection was that he said nothing of the sort prior to the election, nor as President-elect, nor at or after his inauguration, and that he
Re:I am sorry our president is occupied. (Score:5, Interesting)
If I were Biden I'd be straight on the phone to those people Trump is firing, assuring them that if they can hold on to January they will be back in their jobs with full back-pay to cover the 70 days of unemployment.
Surely though Trump knows that stacking the military with his own picks won't help, Biden will just replace them. That makes it much more sinister, what is he planning to do in the next 70 days that having high ranking military personnel on his side helps with?
Re: (Score:2)
It is highly doubtful this can be done. These are positions at will, meaning they serve at the whim of the person in office. Once you're fired, that's it.
That said, they could be rehired into their former positions, as has been suggested to do for Andrew McCabe who, in a petty act by the failure in chief, was fired just days before he would have had his full pension. McCabe could be rehired, serve a week or two which would get him to the magical amount of time, then retire with full benefits.
Re: (Score:2)
Whoa there chief, not sure Andrew McCabe is the hill you want to die on. Besides if his dismissal wasn't above board, let him continue his wrongful dismissal suit. Of course when you or I "lack candor" with the FBI, we wind up in a courtroom or jail, he only got fired.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course when you or I "lack candor" with the FBI, we wind up in a courtroom or jail, he only got fired.
Lacking candor is not the same as committing a crime. However, if you believe it is, then the same applies to Carter Page who outright lied to people, yet he's held up as some hero.
McCabe is an easy win for Biden since no crime was committed and what was alleged doesn't remotely rise to the level of a fireable offense. At best a reprimand and letter in his file.
The only reason McCabe lost his job is be
Re: I am sorry our president is occupied. (Score:2)
A few corrections:
I am *now* turning around to say McCabe was right to be fired and his deputies that were negligent should be in jail.
The last line says the ppl involved in the text message scandal trying to interfere with T getting elected
Re: (Score:2)
Lindsay Graham doesn't do anything in a non-partisan way these days.
Re:I am sorry our president is occupied. (Score:5, Insightful)
If I were Biden I'd be straight on the phone to those people Trump is firing, assuring them that if they can hold on to January they will be back in their jobs with full back-pay to cover the 70 days of unemployment.
Surely though Trump knows that stacking the military with his own picks won't help, Biden will just replace them. That makes it much more sinister, what is he planning to do in the next 70 days that having high ranking military personnel on his side helps with?
Trump is trying to install his own version of a "deep state". Not a surprise, really. He tends to project his own characteristics or tendencies onto his enemies/targets, so it would be expected that he would try to create his own deep state to counter the (supposed) deep state that he has been complaining about for the last 4 years.
Re: (Score:2)
My worry is he will create some crisis (like a staged attack? or even start a war?) and claim emergency wartime powers. Then the line will be "we can't switch presidents while we're under attack".
Re: (Score:2)
If I were Biden I'd be straight on the phone to those people Trump is firing, assuring them that if they can hold on to January they will be back in their jobs with full back-pay to cover the 70 days of unemployment.
That makes no sense. This Whitehouse has been marked by the worst attrition rate of any government. Literally the people being fired were hired by Trump as loyalists to Trump in the first place. That doesn't make them good or worthy of keeping. Hell a lot of them are just getting what they deserve for being post turtles in the first place.
Is that an Australian saying? Post turtle? Literally turtle on a post, elevated to a position they didn't think they'd get into and unable to do anything once they are the
He's probably just making Trouble for Biden (Score:2)
The takeway? The GOP will hurt all of America to hang onto a big of power.
Re:I am sorry our president is occupied. (Score:5, Funny)
He is currently in the middle of having a Temper Tantrum, because he Lost the Elections.
https://twitter.com/SweetttGot... [twitter.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Unlike previous presidents who had lost, but they stilled cared for America, worked to make sure the transition was seamless and smooth.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/t... [wsj.com]
Oops.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He is currently in the middle of having a Temper Tantrum, because he Lost the Elections. Unlike previous presidents who had lost, but they stilled cared for America, worked to make sure the transition was seamless and smooth. Our current president is trying to see how much damage he can do before he leaves.
TicTok is no longer a priority, because he is too busy firing people who is trying their best to keep America Running, and working on a graceful transition for next year.
And seeing how much more money he and the RNC can raise: Trump’s Claims of Election Fraud Are One Last Cynical Push to Raise Money and Maintain Influence [slate.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The democrats have claimed every election they have lost was fraudulently stolen. If Trump concedes before December he will have beaten Gore's temper tantrum
Every time an election happens at least one of the supporters of the losing side makes this claim. The difference here is that its the candidate himself doing it this time. Really class individual that one...
Re: (Score:2)
Show empathy to SORE LOSERS. (Score:4, Interesting)
If one thing's clear in the wake of President-elect Joe Biden's presumptive victory over President Donald Trump, it's that liberals like me need to reach out to people who spent the past four years dehumanizing us and show empathy.
Immediately.
I'm told this cannot wait and it's wholly incumbent upon us, the liberals, to spend time trying to better understand the millions of Americans who voted for Trump and who reacted to every tweet we ever posted with a photo of Trump and the words, "CRY HARDER LIB!!"
I feel bad that I have yet to begin my search for common ground with the people who chanted breathlessly for jailing Trump's political opponents, but I guess I was waiting for them to first accept the results of the presidential election. That was rude of me to think acknowledging reality should be a prerequisite for me to feel deeply concerned about the emotions of people who think Democrats rigged an election but forgot to rig it well enough to win back the U.S. Senate.
I apologize, and I hope that with time, the people who still believe former President Barack Obama is a Muslim will forgive me and let me into their lives so I can gain knowledge and understanding.
After all, I can count on no hands the zero times over the past four years Trump supporters reached out to me in an attempt to bridge the political divide between us. And thank goodness for that, as it might have torn them away from tweeting "HAH! TRIGGERED!" at liberals who were feeling truly hurt by or worried about the actions of the Trump administration.
What's important now is that I, a liberal, reach out to the person who emailed the day after the election to call me "a worthless pile of human garbage." I must recognize that that person is hurting. I must take the first step, and that person should certainly not need to engage in any self-reflection. It is my fault he called me human garbage. Hopefully time can heal that wound.
Some might argue it's impossible to find common ground with people willing to believe there was massive voter fraud when the only evidence presented is conspiratorial word salad served by Trump's bug-eyed attorney, Rudy Giuliani, outside a Philadelphia lawn care company next to a porn shop.
And some might cynically suggest it's hard to take people seriously when they insist the media can't call an election, since they raised no such objection when Trump won in 2016.
But I'm told it would be just like an evil liberal to think such things. Clearly I must do my part, surrender some of my firmly held beliefs and appeal to people who think I should leave the country because all my beliefs are un-American.
So please, to the people who, in the wake of Trump's 2016 victory, told me to "suck it" and offered a mug in which to place my "Liberal Tears," I want to comfort you in this difficult time. Perhaps there's a way I can modify my views on family separation to accommodate your hatred of immigrants? It seems abandoning my disgust that the Trump administration orphaned more than 500 children is the least I can do for people who believe I and other liberals are part of a network of satanic pedophiles.
Would it help if I hit myself in the face a few times? If that's what it takes to find a middle ground in which I feel pain and you feel none, I will certainly start the face-whacking immediately. It's only fair.
Your feelings are extremely important to me, person wearing a pro-Trump T-shirt that says "(EXPLETIVE) Your Feelings." It is up to me to understand you, and I will be happy to start on that as soon as you're done composing an email that calls me "the enemy of the people" and shouting "FAKE NEWS!" while trying to intimidate my colleagues.
Take your time. I'll wait. This is entirely my responsibility, and any suggestion that Biden winning by 5 million votes suggests otherwise is absurd.
I feel bad that I caused you to hate me. Totally my fault. And I don't want you to feel like you need to do a single thing to better understand me.
After the 20
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if the problem's going to get fixed, either you're going to fix it, or the person who created it and doesn't think it's a problem is going to fix it. One question is what would be fair. Another question is what is likely to actually happen.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
But I think both questions lead to the same answer. Why expect the Trumpers to suddenly become rational?
You shouldn't. But you should recognized they are going through the 4 stages of grief. They seem to be stuck between anger and bargaining right now. And before you start asking for a timeline, keep in mind that Rachael Maddow probably took 3-4 years to get through hers. So in that light, perhaps it could be a bit easier to talk to "Trumpers".
Its also important to recognize that Biden doesn't solve all of our problems. Just asking any of the Burnie supporters about that. So I know you are feeling go
Breaking News (Score:5, Insightful)
Breaking News: Donald Trump more interested in announcements of things getting done than in actually getting things done. Where have I heard this before? Ukraine investigation of Hunter Biden. Foxconn factory in Wisconsin. The list goes on.
Re: (Score:2)
At this point I really hope that's true.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Deeply pathetic (Score:5, Insightful)
Leaving aside your partisan leanings—and I know this is hard—the Trump administration has been bad at dealing with the day-to-day operations of government. The churn in the appointments and the general lack of direction end up with situations like this. This isn't particularly unusual or surprising.
Maybe you agree with Trump on ideological grounds, but the fact of the matter is that his appointments are broadly incompetent and this last 4 years has been nothing but unforced errors.
Re:Deeply pathetic (Score:5, Interesting)
It's almost as if the notion of "anyone can be president" or "running the country like a business" is a really bad idea
Re:Deeply pathetic (Score:5, Insightful)
Running the country like a business isn't an all-together bad idea, it just shouldn't be implemented by someone who has 16 failed businesses, 6 personal bankruptcies, and is on their third failed marriage.
Re:Deeply pathetic (Score:5, Insightful)
Jesus was at least willing to die for his beliefs. Trump is only willing for you to die for his.
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus declared backruptcy? Had multiple divorces? Wow, none of that is in my copy of the Bible.
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on how productive you want the country to be. It's this classic argument for "checks and balances". You minimize the maximum loss but you also minimize the maximum gain. I had a friend in college who was a history major always say, having a King can be the best thing for a country but it can also be the worst and most heinous thing for a country. When the King is wise, prudent, and cares for his country -- often it's the most effective form of government. When we aren't, well we all know such hor
Re: (Score:2)
I was somewhat receptive to the argument that "oh well he hasn't caused any direct harm" until coronavirus. Sometimes there are problems that need to be dealt with. Now a quarter-million Americans are dead. I cannot claim to know precisely how many might have been saved with better leadership, but it is indisuputable we have done very badly compared to peer nations.
The list of nations above us in deaths per capita is not company the
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah. I agree this was his most significant screw up. I think the issue though is the argument that no one man is responsible for the outcome. The same concept of "checks and balances" emphasizes a balance of state power and federal power among other division of resources. Trump is clearly the weak link the chain in this case but I am unsure how much better things would of been if he would of been science-based and prescriptive with solutions that work to combat the virus. Republican states could of equally
Re:Deeply pathetic (Score:5, Interesting)
- General John E. Hyten, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (source [people.com])
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
“The major problem - one of the major problems, for there are several - one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.” - Douglas Ada
Re: (Score:2)
It is in a large part because of their lack of staffing. The administration has simply failed to attempt to fill many positions, has had a very hard time filling positions, and to top it off has had very high turnover in the positions that were filled, seemingly of its own volition. As a result there aren't many hands on deck, so things don't get filed, reports don't get read, and decisions are not made. (there are other issues with decision making, the environment is one where the President arbitrarily ove
Re: (Score:2)
Are Trump's corporations like this? Does he have massive turn-over of staff?
Re: (Score:2)
The reality TV star was famous for his line, "You're Fired". The business man was famous for not paying people after firing them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Since Trump lost the election, they've been paying a lot of attention to restaffing the top civilian jobs at the Pentagon though, which is slightly worrying. Just because somebody has a track record of not following through doesn't mean he won't act when his own self-interest is at stake.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you agree with Trump on ideological grounds, but the fact of the matter is that his appointments are broadly incompetent and this last 4 years has been nothing but unforced errors.
We all know that Trump only hires the best people (because he tells us it is so) and he only fires incompetent twits. The fact that these have often been the same person in no way reflects on Trump and he accepts no responsibility for it.
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds nothing like previous administrations. We used to have serious people, agree with them or not, running this country. Trump is not a serious person, he is a clown and his clown car has burned through an un fucking precedented number of people he's fired and burnt bridges with, it's not even close.
We're no longer a nation of serious people. We have clowns on the left who rant and rave about capitalism, and clowns on the right whose main goal in life is to "pwn the libs". Had Obama worn white after lab
Re: (Score:2)
There are varying degrees to which government is effective. The US government has actually been extremely competent at a lot of things for years, and THAT'S actually the non-partisan take. There are many spots for improvement, but the government does a remarkable job of keeping a lot of things running and keeping people alive. Disaster support, infrastructure, safety agencies, etc. They're all actually pretty decent in the long view.
Every government has its weak spots, but this particular administration is
Re: (Score:2)
Not relevant for the coup. (Score:2)
Attention span of a gnat (Score:4, Funny)
TikTok, just stay quiet, Don't ask any questions. Trump will forget you, Biden isn't interested. Draw no attention on yourself.
Here's the reason: TRUMP LOST (Score:5, Insightful)
TRUMP is a loser. A poor loser, but a loser nonetheless.
Now that he has to focus on bogus lawsuits and pretending he got re-elected,
he has less legal time to after TikTok.
Heck, he's renting out landscaping company warehouses and train depot
warehouses and STILL nobody's showing up.
Pathetic. But there's your reason. TRUMP is a LOSER.
E
P.S. For those who are fans of the idiot, good for you. Glad you have an opinion. Don't want to hear it. I'm closed minded because I think the POTUS should be mentally stable, able, and have knowledge above a first grader.
Re: (Score:2)
People can be against wannabe-dictator Trump and still think Biden is already close to being replaced for failing mental abilities.
The real world is not always yes/no, with us/against us, black/white. I don't know why most USAmericans think like that.
In the real world, there's shades of grey in the shades of grey.
Re: (Score:2)
Lol, found the RWNJ. This is a common conspiracy theory, they act like Joe is so bumbling and crazy (why, the gaffes! Nevermind Trump's constant senile bullshit, the gaffes!).
Nobody will be 25ing him, the only real risk is a stroke or death at his age, there's no conspiracy to install someone else as President.
Sorry, I forgot, your ilk call him "pedo Joe", right? Because Q. Ahahahaha.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think if there's anything that the last 4 years has shown us is that the 25th is toothless. As long as the president can put his pants on in the morning, he won't be removed.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it was probably a poor choice of words. I mean effectively useless given the current political climate.
They contacted the owner of "TikTok" (Score:5, Funny)
TikTok Forgotten (Score:4, Insightful)
because there are no more Trump re-election rallies to hold.
Wasn't part of the reason for banning TikTok was to prevent their users from organizing and sabotaging Trump rallies like with the one in Tulsa, Oklahoma?
Re: (Score:3)
because there are no more Trump re-election rallies to hold.
You think just because the election is over Trump is going to stop holding rallies?
Re: (Score:2)
because there are no more Trump re-election rallies to hold.
You think just because the election is over Trump is going to stop holding rallies?
That's not what I wrote.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you need new glasses? "because there are no more Trump re-election rallies to hold." He absolutely specified re-election rallies.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump is going to stop holding rallies?
Rallies and re-election rallies are not the same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Rallies and re-election rallies are not the same thing.
Trump can continue to hold re-election rallies. He probably will. He can still be re-elected. He has been elected once. He is still eligible for a second term. Any rallies he holds in an effort to get re-elected in 2024 are re-election rallies.
Personally I expect Trump's next re-election rally to be January 20th. He's that petty and that narcissistic.
What's up is the deadline. (Score:2)
Damage controll (Score:2)
They're busy trying to steal an election (Score:5, Insightful)
Tik Tok was always about one thing, youth were organizing politically on it and the right wing will always attack youth political organization when it happens organically (they're happy to create stuff like "alt-right" with their think tanks though, but only when they've got strict control of the message).
Young people swing left because they are less conservative and the right wing's message of Nationalism, traditional (read: archaic) values and low taxes only appeals to conservatives who are frightened of change (because as Abe Simpson once said, "I used to be with it!"). The young are the natural enemies of the right wing and as such any attempt by them to politically organize will always be attacked. With Nixon's drug war very slowly winding down they're going to have to do something.
Circling the drain (Score:2)
This is all because he's to busy trying to stay King. His time is circling the drain and he's afraid of the pending legal issues as a civilian.
Re: (Score:3)
One thing I really look forward is his tenure as most hated man in America, which he will be - by far. Having 20 million retards who worship you is little consolation when 100+million Americans absolutely fucking loathe you, and another 100+million who see you as sideshow entertainment at best.
He's lucky he'll have secret service protection or he'd be constantly milkshaked, spat on, or worse. As it stands he's a fool if he ever eats fast food that anyone knows he will be eating, or it'll be more cum and thi
lol (Score:2)
Attention span (Score:3)
The Trump administration has the same attention span of a toddler, but acts less rationally.
Dear TikTok.... (Score:2)
You're in luck, President Trump has apparently grown bored with trying to ban you, and his administration is a bit occupied with trying to change the results of a free and fair election in order to retain power. For you, this is probably a good thing, but for the rest of us, not so much.
Re: (Score:2)
In Communist USA they would be banned.
Re: (Score:2)
There are actually decent arguments in favor of that approach. This is part of what things like TRAP https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com] are about. Are you in favor of that? If not, then think of another approach. Or proclaim that you are a *real* isolationist, and don't believe in allowing any imports or exports.