5 ms·

There is no evidence that what you say is true. A tweet is not a legally binding statement.

• prpl 8mo ago
  What part? Are you doubting that they are being designated as a supply chain risk? Or the implications of being designated as one? We do have a recent example with Huawei, and it did fall just like this - and that was just some hardware.
• lemming 8mo ago
  It will be true as soon as it becomes official though, assuming they actually go through with it and this is not just a bargaining tactic.
  • crummy 8mo ago
    Won’t that require an act of congress? How likely does that seem?
    • prpl 8mo ago
      Huawei was not on the NDAA (the congress part) until August 2019, well after companies started cutting ties in April/May of that year
• jzig 8mo ago
  When did legality apply to this administration?
• vharuck 8mo ago
  >A tweet is not a legally binding statement. In the recent Supreme Court hearing over the firing of Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve, the administration is acting like Truth Social posts are official notices. >Several justices have noted the unusual nature of the case before it, which began with a post by Trump on his social media platform, Truth Social, that said he would fire Cook. >Jackson wondered why that would be considered sufficient notice: “How is it that we can assume that she’s on social media?” https://apnews.com/live/supreme-court-lisa-cook-federal-reserve-arguments-updates https://apnews.com/live/supreme-court-lisa-cook-federal-rese...