Earlier this week, I hosted a debate on the TikTok bill with Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.). I respect our two countries’ mutual commitment to the Constitution. Usually, the two men stand on the same side on important issues in Congress, but that was not the case this time. That is not the case with the TikTok bill. Roy is one of the bill’s sponsors, and Massey is one of the bill’s main opponents. I haven’t seen an issue divide conservatives so sharply in a long time. Before this week’s debate, I wasn’t sure where I stood on this issue either.
I’ll do it now. I am against banning TikTok. I will explain.
Many of the assurances about the TikTok bill sound similar to what supporters said about the Patriot Act.
Both Roy and Massey are concerned about national security. We both know what we face with China and how big a threat the Chinese Communist Party is. Most importantly, we both love the Constitution and are passionate defenders of freedom. That’s why I asked them to discuss it because I really respected them. It was so refreshing to see people discuss their differences, but no one was offended.
We have gone through much of the bill line by line, and there are several things that are concerning. For example, if you look at section 2 ofAct to protect Americans from regulatory applications by foreign adversaries” to see that this charge doesn’t just apply to phone apps.individual website It may also be confiscated. That should send chills down your spine.
Supporters of the bill note that the power only applies to apps and websites belonging to “foreign adversaries.” It’s pretty vague. When you say a website or app is controlled by a foreign enemy, who has the power to decide who is and is not the foreign enemy?
When Tucker Carlson visited Russia in February, how many people said he was nothing more than a pawn of Vladimir Putin? When President Trump visited Kim Jong Un, how many people said he was controlled by North Korea and Russia? We have been accused of being an asset to Israel, and many in our government are currently treating Israel like a foreign enemy. If the president decides that Tucker Carlson is controlled by a foreign enemy, does that mean he can just walk away? What about Trump? What about you and me?
The bill would allow apps and websites to be seized “if the President determines that they pose an ongoing threat to the national security of the United States.” What does “national security threat” mean to the United States? Just in the last year alone, we’ve heard that “election deniers” are a threat to governments, along with “vaccine deniers,” “Christian nationalists,” and “climate change deniers.” Do we fall into that category?
We are not against the government. We are trying to stop the ruling class from overthrowing the government.
We believe in the Constitution, but the ruling class does not. Therefore, if someone is a foreign enemy, They are teeth.
Another problematic provision of the bill is “covered companies” whose primary purpose is to “enable users to post reviews, product reviews, business reviews, or travel information or reviews.” Is Yelp in the midst of a sale to Communist China? It appears that while you and I hung out to dry, someone pulled Washington’s strings to keep him from being affected by the bill.
These are just some of the worrying points raised in this week’s debate, and why I oppose the ban.
I love Chip Roy and I trust him. He is a constitutional scholar. He’s a freedom-loving Texan and someone you want nothing to do with. But I don’t trust a government that seeks more control over its people while making bed with big tech and China. I don’t trust governments that seem to care less about their people than oligarchy. I can’t give more power to the rich, big corporations, and lawyers, and I won’t give more power to a president who won’t uphold the Constitution at all costs.
So I arrived at this question. You may not think so. But whatever you do, carefully consider the cost of your current TikTok bill. Many of the assurances about this bill sound similar to what its sponsors said about the Patriot Act. Remember when they tried to allay our fears by saying they would never use fear against us? They said all they have to do is change the definition of extremism. A ban on TikTok would simply require changing the definition of “foreign adversary.” They can definitely turn this on you.
Want more information about Glenn Beck? Get Glenn’s free email newsletter Get his latest insights, top stories, show prep and more delivered to your inbox.
