foregoneconclusion

sconosciuto said:

So much for the rule of law

Now the Trump administration can turn its attention to the pressing issues that American voters were concerned with in the election like threatening Denmark to try and force them to sell Greenland. 

mikethemartian said:

What’s funny is that technically the promises made so far by the incoming administration are not binding since they aren’t in office until tomorrow. So if they want to do a 180 on TikTok for whatever reason they could prosecute the company for noncompliance.

Noncompliance = not being Trump-friendly enough. That's the irony of TikTok claiming it's a win for the 1st amendment. 

chasm said: But until the US government can prove in a court of law that its evidence of spying or privacy invasion or whatever else TikTok is accused of is real beyond a shadow of a doubt, the law Congress passed should be nullifed by the (equally corrupt) Supreme Court as blatantly unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court already unanimously upheld the legality of the ban.

A. Mobile apps have always been significantly LESS EXPENSIVE than apps for desktop or console systems.

B. The idea that alternate app stores would provide significant savings for mobile app users HAS NO BASIS IN REALITY. 

C. Gaming apps generate the most revenue on mobile by a wide margin. Gaming apps are entertainment and NOT A NECESSITY FOR MOBILE USERS. 

Cesar Battistini Maziero said:

Why don't they question all the lobby money they get?

Bunch of hypocrites. The reckoning its coming.

They don't question it because there are a lot more rules/regulations that have to be followed with lobbying (like lobbyist donations made to campaign funds) than there are for an inauguration. Example: an inaugural committee isn't required to provide details on how the donations are spent. That was an issue with Trump's 2017 inauguration because Trump took in twice the amount of $$ that Barack Obama received from donors in 2009 but held far fewer inaugural events than Obama did.