21–30 of 118 posts
How is it ok for the US president to ban a media company? How is it ok for the US president to put pressure on the owners of a company to sell to another company? This must violate > 1 article of the constitution.
The idea that corporations are kowtowing to a polticians individual personal wishes - rather than operating under a framework of laws and regulations based on principles and administered fairly to all - should be offensive to every single American, regardless of who the players are or their country of origin.
Ps: I side with Trump on this one. Just hate the fact that no Republican opposes him anymore.
The idea that corporations are kowtowing to a polticians individual personal wishes - rather than operating under a framework of laws and regulations based on principles and administered fairly to all - should be offensive to every single American, regardless of who the players are or their country of origin.
Even more pronounced is the silence of life long legislators who were always opposed to this kind of strong man government all along. Ps: I side with Trump on this one. Just hate the fact that no Republican opposes him anymore.
In fairness, I guess people are like that as well. Maybe that sort of duplicity is simply endemic to being human?
How is it ok for the US president to ban a media company? How is it ok for the US president to put pressure on the owners of a company to sell to another company? This must violate > 1 article of the constitution.
Why would a media company be special. This type of thing happens all the time, for example the US government banned a Chinese company from purchasing Lattice Semiconductor, the third biggest FPGA company (and really a much smaller player than the big two).
If Tiktok was European/Japanese/Korean/Canadian this would not happen, as those countries are free democracies and work with a similar/common rule of law 1. China doesn’t play with the same rules, and it has been proven to be a malicious player 2. They don’t allow western companies to operate freely in their country, why should we let them to? 3. The US and to a lesser degree Europe, are in a de-facto new Cold War, a…
We have Checks & Balances for a reason.
If Tiktok was European/Japanese/Korean/Canadian this would not happen, as those countries are free democracies and work with a similar/common rule of law 1. China doesn’t play with the same rules, and it has been proven to be a malicious player 2. They don’t allow western companies to operate freely in their country, why should we let them to? 3. The US and to a lesser degree Europe, are in a de-facto new Cold War, a…
If Tiktok was European/Japanese/Korean/Canadian this would not happen, as those countries are free democracies and work with a similar/common rule of law 1. China doesn’t play with the same rules, and it has been proven to be a malicious player 2. They don’t allow western companies to operate freely in their country, why should we let them to? 3. The US and to a lesser degree Europe, are in a de-facto new Cold War, a…
If the government wants to restrict the ability of Chinese business to grow in the US, that's fine, but it should be under the existing framework of law that we follow. This should be passed through Congress and the SC as a law , not an executive order. We have Checks & Balances for a reason.
Look up how Japanese companies are treated in late 80s and 90s.
When one felt under threat, all rules will be forgone.
If Tiktok was European/Japanese/Korean/Canadian this would not happen, as those countries are free democracies and work with a similar/common rule of law 1. China doesn’t play with the same rules, and it has been proven to be a malicious player 2. They don’t allow western companies to operate freely in their country, why should we let them to? 3. The US and to a lesser degree Europe, are in a de-facto new Cold War, a…
If the government wants to restrict the ability of Chinese business to grow in the US, that's fine, but it should be under the existing framework of law that we follow. This should be passed through Congress and the SC as a law , not an executive order. We have Checks & Balances for a reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the government wants to restrict the ability of Chinese business to grow in the US, that's fine, but it should be under the existing framework of law that we follow. This should be passed through Congress and the SC as a law , not an executive order. We have Checks & Balances for a reason.
I doubt that is the case. Look up how Japanese companies are treated in late 80s and 90s. When one felt under threat, all rules will be forgone.
How is it ok for the US president to ban a media company? How is it ok for the US president to put pressure on the owners of a company to sell to another company? This must violate > 1 article of the constitution.
Why would a media company be special. This type of thing happens all the time, for example the US government banned a Chinese company from purchasing Lattice Semiconductor, the third biggest FPGA company (and really a much smaller player than the big two).
Viewpoint discrimination is against the first amendment. We know Trump wasn’t offended by the idea that foreign countries might be trying to help him get elected, and has repeatedly called it a “Russia hoax”, but now that a social media app has anti-Trump users it’s suddenly a national security threat without any evidence provided?