 This is not an attempt to ban TikTok. It's an attempt to make TikTok better. Tick, tack, toe. A winner. A winner. The House of Representatives just voted overwhelmingly for a draconian piece of legislation that could effectively ban TikTok. And on top of that, it would also give the president the power to potentially ban other social media platforms as well. It is a genuine threat to the First Amendment. And the fact that this unconstitutional legislation has so much bipartisan support is very worrying. Now, as you can see, it passed by a vote of 352 to 65, with 197 Republicans and 155 Democrats supporting it respectively. And as for those opposed, there were 15 Republicans and 50 Democrats who voted against it. This includes progressives like Jamal Bowman, Corey Bush, Maxwell Frost, Prima Jayapal, Ro Khanna, Barbara Lee, Summer Lee, Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Mark Pocan, Ayanna Presley, as well as Republicans like Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massey. Now, progressives like Tlaib and Grehalva didn't participate in the vote, which is why you don't see them voting against it. But here's what the bill would do as explained by Rolling Stone. Quote, the bill would require TikTok to sever itself completely from its Chinese parent company ByteDance or face a potential ban from mobile app stores and web hosting services. The bill would also create a process through which the president can designate certain social media applications with ties to foreign governments as a national security risk. Now, the lawmakers who support this, like Nancy Pelosi, for example, are pretending as if this wouldn't actually ban TikTok. It would improve TikTok. But that's a lie. What they're doing is forcing ByteDance to divest entirely from its app within six months. And if they refuse to do so, they are no longer allowed to legally operate within the United States. This is a ban, full stop. Maybe the ban doesn't take effect immediately, but it's a ban down the line, unless they choose to sell the company. Now, let's say, hypothetically speaking, that ByteDance chose to divest and they listened to Congress. Well, what would happen? They could sell it to an American company or sell it off to a billionaire. For example, Activision Blizzard's ex CEO, Bobby Kotick, who ran a once-respected gaming company into the fucking ground, has expressed interest in acquiring TikTok. And also, Trump supporting billionaire Kevin O'Leary, for example, has also expressed his interest in buying the app. And it's not like we don't have any recent examples to demonstrate the danger of billionaires buying social media apps. But that's what Congress wants to do to TikTok. So the question is, why are they even doing this to begin with? And second of all, what's the rush? Because this bill, believe it or not, was just introduced last Tuesday on March 5th, and it passed just eight days later. So apparently, Congress can get things done pretty quickly, if they want to do it. So the question is, why the sudden urgency to ban TikTok when there are so many other crises that are more pressing that they should be addressing before this, if this were a problem? Well, they say TikTok is a problem for two primary reasons. First and foremost, the Republican sponsor of this legislation, Mike Gallagher, who says he definitely doesn't want to ban TikTok, by the way, says that the app poses a threat to national security. Now, here's the problem with that claim. NPR reports, officials have not offered public evidence of the Chinese Communist Party using the app for surveillance or propaganda purposes, though experts say it is theoretically possible that Beijing could use TikTok to push its agenda. So it could be used for nefarious purposes by the Chinese government, but they have no evidence that that's indeed the case. However, they do have evidence that Oracle, for example, has been harvesting the data of billions of users for years, and that Mark Zuckerberg literally leveraged user data for his own personal use, and under Elon Musk's ownership, Twitter has devolved into a haven for Nazis, but they haven't taken action there for some reason. Now, I'm not saying that Congress should ban these websites. All I'm saying is, in the face of evidence of demonstrable harm caused by these websites, they haven't acted. No action against Oracle or Meta or Twitter. So when it comes to TikTok, though, all of a sudden, they have to take action because of a theoretical harm, not a demonstrable harm. They presented no evidence that this is what TikTok is doing. So their worst fears have not come to fruition, but yet they want to ban TikTok. Now, look, I'm not saying TikTok is innocent. I'm sure that they're harvesting our data and violating our privacy, just like any other social media platform. The question is, why are they being targeted when other websites aren't? Well, that brings us to the second reason. This is a very popular app with young people. That's why there's this urgency, and the propaganda disseminated by traditional media outlets isn't persuasive to young people, in part because of apps like TikTok, where young people access and share information. And since the government believes that TikTok has undercut their ability to brainwash its own citizens, they want to ban it so that way they can regain control of the narrative. That is what this is about. Biden, who said that he would sign this legislation into law if it reached his desk, is frustrated that young people aren't receptive to his lies about Israel and Gaza. And they've implicitly admitted this. Rolling Stone continues, a Biden administration spokesperson suggested to Rolling Stone ahead of the vote that foreign powers can use the app to influence Americans' views and beliefs. The warning echoes comments made by White House Press Secretary Karin John Pierre last week. The administration doesn't see this as banning these apps. That's not what this is, she said, but rather ensuring that their ownership isn't in the hands of those who made to us harm. But they get even more explicit than that. White of the past shared the following on Twitter. In the Wall Street Journal, and the quote from the lead dem on the effort to ban TikTok, quote, October 7th really opened people's eyes to what's happening on TikTok and its differential treatment of different topics. So that's what this is about. Now it is bullshit to say that TikTok is trying to purposefully present people with a particular worldview, because this is an app based on an algorithm. So what you see is based on what you like to watch, like most social media websites. So what they're trying to do is stop this website from further undermining their legitimacy. Because when they say that Israel isn't doing a genocide and they're not committing war crimes, well, people can log on to TikTok and see with their own two eyes what the IDF is doing. And that's what our government is supporting. And they don't want us to see the truth. So they're trying to just cut off the flow of information so that way they can lie to us. And we accept those lies. This is a deeply, deeply authoritarian move. And if you doubt whether or not this is authoritarian, consider how you'd feel about it if another government did the same thing. For example, during the Arab Spring in 2011, the Algerian government actually shut down access to Facebook entirely for a week because people were using it to organize protests against the government. Now, nobody would doubt an autocratic government would resort to draconian tactics like that to shut down dissent. But the question is, why is it okay? Why is it different if America does it? The answer is, it's not different. But put aside the chilling effect that this would have on free speech for a moment and just think about how politically stupid this is for Biden. Let's say that this were to pass the Senate and he signed it into law in April or May. That means that the effect of ban would take place by September or October, right before the election, when millions of young people will be pissed off at him even more and that anger will be fresh on their minds. I mean, young people would probably be less angry if the House passed the resolution telling everyone under 35 to go fuck themselves. But if you take away an app that brings happiness and joy to millions of young people and not just young people to be clear, older people as well, but if you take that away from them right before the election, there's going to be hell to pay. And to make matters worse, Trump has reversed his stance in an effort to capitalize on Biden's political stupidity here. Rolling Stone continues, Trump and some of his advisors may also feel that taking a soft approach to TikTok could boost his profile with young voters and contrast him with President Joe Biden who promised to sign the legislation should it reach his desk. So that's nice. Biden is just, for some reason, handing Trump a political win. And to be clear, I don't believe Trump when he says that he doesn't want to ban TikTok, but if he tries to contrast himself as the person who supports free speech and isn't in favor of banning TikTok, that could help him. If your entire life is TikTok and you formed a business on TikTok and make a living on TikTok or you use TikTok to promote your small business, that could be the number one issue that sways this election in these battleground states. So it is a deeply idiotic move by the Biden administration and any Democrat who's supporting this is helping Trump. Now, I want to get to the reasoning of some lawmakers who oppose this. But just to show you how nonsensical this legislation is, Sahil Kapoor of NBC News explains, quote, Representative Mark Pocan says the admin's TikTok briefing was so unconvincing it moved him from open to no on a ban. Quote, they did a lot of could have maybe all this without an urgent reason to do this. It's very big brother-ish. They definitely put me in a no column now. So just stop for a moment and think about this. Mark Pocan went into this briefing with an open mind thinking that they'd have some bombshell information about TikTok and prove that it's the national security threat that they say it is. But the evidence that they presented was so unconvincing he is now actively opposed to this ban and he voted against it in the end. Now, Pocan isn't the only one to have a change of heart. John Fetterman, for example, perhaps the loudest cheerleader for Israel's genocide in the Senate, came out in support of the ban, writing, I support holding TikTok accountable because it's a no brainer. The Chinese Communist Party shouldn't have access to our kid's data. Trump's abrupt change. Fuck out of here. Check that man's mattress for gold bars. But as Matt Bender points out, Fetterman was very excited about joining TikTok not that long ago. Now, Thomas Massey, who is one of the few Republicans who oppose this, points out the broad language in the bill. The so-called TikTok ban is a Trojan horse. The president will be given the power to ban websites, not just apps. The person breaking the new law is deemed to be the U.S. or offshore internet hosting service or app store, not the foreign adversary. Now, Maxwell Frost also makes a really good point, quote, I am a no on the TikTok bill we are about to vote on. I believe the bill does set TikTok up to be banned. There are first amendment issues I see with taking away a platform that over 170 million Americans use, and this won't fix the serious issues we have with data privacy. And that's exactly it. And get this, even Marjorie Green sees the issues with this bill, quote, as the only member of Congress who has ever been banned from social media. Of course, she's going to make this about herself and play the victim. I oppose today's TikTok ban bill. This bill would open Pandora's box and create a slippery slope for future government censorship of Americans and our precious First Amendment. Now, I'm not showing you her tweet to legitimize her or proper up because even a broken clock can be right twice a day. But the reason why I showed you what she said about this is because it should alarm every single one of us that our Democratic president and a lot of Democrats in Congress are to the right of a literal Christian nationalist fascist on a free speech issue. Absolutely, none of us should feel comfortable with this. But the good news is this legislation is probably going to sit in the Senate for quite some time. And Democratic leadership, at least for now, seems skeptical about it, although there are some exceptions. NBC News reports Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer was non-committal on whether the Senate would vote on the House bill, telling reporters Tuesday, I'll have to consult and intend to consult with my relevant committee chairman to see what their views would be. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, the judiciary committee chair, acknowledged that a ban on TikTok may not be politically beneficial for President Biden's re-election in November, quote, cutting out a large group of young voters is not the best known strategy for re-election, Durbin said. They love TikTok. I know from my own grandkids and others, and it's part of their lifestyle, and they don't want to lose it, he added. However, Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Mark Warner and leading Republican Marco Rubio of Florida said in a joint statement Wednesday that they were encouraged by the bipartisan House vote, adding that they'll work together to get this bill passed through the Senate and signed into law. Honestly, Dick Durbin, being one of the more reasonable senators was not on my 2023 or 2024 bingo card, because remember, he also was the first senator to call for a ceasefire. And now he seems to be one of the few Democrats to grasp how catastrophic this would be from a political standpoint. But it wouldn't just be bad from a political standpoint. It's bad from a First Amendment standpoint. It's bad from an economic standpoint. TikTok has made the point that this would be devastating to the US economy because there are so many small businesses, literally millions that have been launched on TikTok. They also advertise through TikTok. And a lot of people make their living through TikTok. It is a job creator. And if this is banned, those people would lose their livelihoods like that. And even if there's no economic value or monetary value in TikTok, just browsing it makes people happy. I, for one, love TikTok. I don't use it all the time. But when I do, I like it. Why would you take that away from people? It's such a terrible idea. And now it's the time to make our voices heard, right? If you don't want this to be banned, now is the time as it sits in the Senate collecting dust, call your senator and tell them to support the First Amendment and vote no on a TikTok ban because this is authoritarian. It's unconstitutional. And we shouldn't even have to worry that our lawmakers would take an app away from us that we like. But this is where we're at. You know, they won't give us healthcare. They won't raise the minimum wage. But when it comes to doing things that we don't like, they're on it. So don't let them do this. Call your senator and tell them to vote no on this.