Alan Rosenstein

Similarly, during the litigation at the D.C. Circuit, the government submitted classified information that was only available to the judges and not to the litigants, to TikTok, and obviously not to the public. TikTok was very upset about this and wrote a brief asking the judges not to use this evidence.

Notably, in the opinion, the judges explicitly said that they were not using that evidence, not because they objected to it, but because they didn't need to, that they were comfortable upholding the law based purely on what was in the public record. Which I think is notable. So what's in the public record? What do we know?

Notably, in the opinion, the judges explicitly said that they were not using that evidence, not because they objected to it, but because they didn't need to, that they were comfortable upholding the law based purely on what was in the public record. Which I think is notable. So what's in the public record? What do we know?

Notably, in the opinion, the judges explicitly said that they were not using that evidence, not because they objected to it, but because they didn't need to, that they were comfortable upholding the law based purely on what was in the public record. Which I think is notable. So what's in the public record? What do we know?

On the one hand, what we don't have, and the government has never pretended actually to its credit, what we don't have is smoking gun evidence. We don't have evidence of the Chinese government... telling ByteDance to either collect US person data from TikTok and give it to the Chinese government, or to modify the algorithm so as to boost some pro-Chinese content.

On the one hand, what we don't have, and the government has never pretended actually to its credit, what we don't have is smoking gun evidence. We don't have evidence of the Chinese government... telling ByteDance to either collect US person data from TikTok and give it to the Chinese government, or to modify the algorithm so as to boost some pro-Chinese content.

On the one hand, what we don't have, and the government has never pretended actually to its credit, what we don't have is smoking gun evidence. We don't have evidence of the Chinese government... telling ByteDance to either collect US person data from TikTok and give it to the Chinese government, or to modify the algorithm so as to boost some pro-Chinese content.

And these are the two concerns, data privacy and content manipulation. These are the two concerns that Congress cited when passing the law. So we don't have a smoking gun. But what we do have, I think, is everything short of that, right? We have a gun. It's on the table. It's loaded and it's pointed at us.

And these are the two concerns, data privacy and content manipulation. These are the two concerns that Congress cited when passing the law. So we don't have a smoking gun. But what we do have, I think, is everything short of that, right? We have a gun. It's on the table. It's loaded and it's pointed at us.

And these are the two concerns, data privacy and content manipulation. These are the two concerns that Congress cited when passing the law. So we don't have a smoking gun. But what we do have, I think, is everything short of that, right? We have a gun. It's on the table. It's loaded and it's pointed at us.

And what I mean by that is we know, and there's years of evidence about this, that China has both the means and the motivations to carry this kind of behavior out.

And what I mean by that is we know, and there's years of evidence about this, that China has both the means and the motivations to carry this kind of behavior out.

And what I mean by that is we know, and there's years of evidence about this, that China has both the means and the motivations to carry this kind of behavior out.

Yeah. Look, none of this is great. I want to emphasize this is not a good outcome. This is just a less bad outcome in the eyes of the government, at least in my estimation based on what I understand. But reasonable people very much can disagree here. I want to emphasize that. It's just a less bad outcome than the other outcomes.

Yeah. Look, none of this is great. I want to emphasize this is not a good outcome. This is just a less bad outcome in the eyes of the government, at least in my estimation based on what I understand. But reasonable people very much can disagree here. I want to emphasize that. It's just a less bad outcome than the other outcomes.

Yeah. Look, none of this is great. I want to emphasize this is not a good outcome. This is just a less bad outcome in the eyes of the government, at least in my estimation based on what I understand. But reasonable people very much can disagree here. I want to emphasize that. It's just a less bad outcome than the other outcomes.

With respect to John Oliver's point about data privacy, I would say the following. It is a mistake, and I don't think the government has justified this law in this way. If it has, it's been a mistake. The law is not justified as a general data privacy law. It is a data privacy law about the specific threat that China poses to the data privacy of Americans.

With respect to John Oliver's point about data privacy, I would say the following. It is a mistake, and I don't think the government has justified this law in this way. If it has, it's been a mistake. The law is not justified as a general data privacy law. It is a data privacy law about the specific threat that China poses to the data privacy of Americans.

With respect to John Oliver's point about data privacy, I would say the following. It is a mistake, and I don't think the government has justified this law in this way. If it has, it's been a mistake. The law is not justified as a general data privacy law. It is a data privacy law about the specific threat that China poses to the data privacy of Americans.

That's different than a generalized data privacy concern. Now, we can have that. That's a very separate conversation, which we can have, about is it a good thing that DoorDash, as John Oliver says, has a picture of your small intestine, right? I don't love that either. But that's not the concern at issue here. The concern here is not just that someone has your data, right?