On January 19, 2025 at 18:22 UTC, I replied to @ariesnotebook’s uncertainty about whether TikTok would return quickly and whether a deal involving access for our social media apps in China would take heavy negotiation. I wrote, “Nvm Trump is quick!!” This was my updated reaction, not confirmation that a deal was completed or TikTok returned.
Earlier on January 19, 2025, I said TikTok might not come back as fast as I had thought and that requiring our social media apps to be allowed in China would likely take heavy negotiation. I wondered whether Trump could negotiate a fast deal. I was quoting @elonmusk, who opposed a ban on free-speech grounds and described TikTok’s access in America alongside 𝕏’s lack of access in China as unbalanced; those views were Musk’s, not mine.
On January 19, 2025, I called a 50-50 joint venture negotiation for TikTok “pretty cool.” This was an appealing negotiation concept, not a report of an agreement. The post quoted @TrumpDailyPosts, which said Trump was asking companies not to let TikTok stay dark and proposed an executive order extending the period before legal prohibitions took effect, to allow time for a national-security deal. The quoted post also said the order would confirm no liability for companies that had helped keep TikTok available before the order, and invoked Americans’ desire to see Monday’s Inauguration and other events. It did not specify the extension’s duration, and the quote ended mid-sentence.
On January 18, 2025 at 17:17 UTC, I shared an item titled “TikTok Ban Tomorrow, Trump Memecoin Launch, & More.” The captured post gives no details about the linked item, the TikTok ban, or the memecoin launch.
On January 17, 2025, I remarked, “We’re living in some interesting cultural times.💀” I did not identify particular events or explain what cultural changes I had in mind.
Later that day, I called something “ridiculous” and shared https://t.co/Rn5YlQiMpJ. The capture does not identify what I was reacting to or what the link contains.
On January 17, 2025, I said, “Next week is gonna be absolutely nuts.” I did not specify what I expected to happen. This was my reaction to a quoted post from @NewsWire_US, which claimed the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 to uphold the TikTok ban law; that ruling and score were the quoted account’s claim, not an independently verified report from me.
On January 17, 2025, replying to @saxyjacky, I wrote, “I hope so” and “Don’t want TikTok to be banned tho.” The capture does not show what I hoped for or what @saxyjacky had said.
I followed the possibility of a TikTok ban and commented on public opposition, precautionary diversification, and users moving to RedNote. The captures record my reactions and advice, but do not establish the eventual legal or policy outcome.
On 2024-12-10, I shared an article link with the comment “TikTok Might Actually Get Banned Soon..” I presented a ban as a possibility; the capture does not include the article’s details or supporting evidence.
On 2024-12-18, I advised people relying entirely on TikTok to consider diversifying as a precaution. I named no alternative platforms or specific plan. The post I quoted was by @aaronrubin, who said the Supreme Court would hear the case on Jan 10 and that Apple and Google were scheduled to delist TikTok from US app stores 9 days after the hearing; these were @aaronrubin’s claims, not events I independently reported.
On 2025-01-12, I said popular sentiment over the TikTok ban was largely negative and that people wanted TikTok to stay. The capture does not explain how I assessed that sentiment or what evidence supported it.
On 2025-01-16, I said I had caught “my girl” on RedNote the previous day and called the TikTok ban a failure for the US. The capture does not clarify who I meant by “my girl,” what I meant by “backfired,” or what evidence supported my opinion.
Related: us china trade talks and truces, chinese companies on the world stage, china s ai challenge