4 ms·
Seems natural. The only proof he has of the claims of risks against national security seems to be his typical wild ramblings of “a lot of people say! Everyone k
by boublepop 6y ago
Seems natural. The only proof he has of the claims of risks against national security seems to be his typical wild ramblings of “a lot of people say! Everyone knows! Just read the manuals, read the books!” While not being able to mention a single name or fact.
If trump forces trough this sale, the EU are bring morons if they don’t forcefully take over EU facebooks and LinkedIn business by Wednesday next week.
- chrisco255 6y agoPublic rhetoric is one thing, but private discussions go on with the president from intelligence officials all the time.
- dodobirdlord 6y agoThe claim isn’t a dispute about the legitimacy of the national security grounds, that will probably come later. The claim is that the EO prohibits retaining US lawyers, which is pretty clearly a violation of due process.
- blisseyGo 6y agoRegarding the retaining US lawyers part - I think it would fall under FARA: https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara
- dodobirdlord 6y agoThe EO imposes a prohibition on financial transactions between US citizens (and probably also residents?) and ByteDance, so they wouldn't be able to pay their lawyers even if registered. So it's essentially a ban on having lawyers