Fox News Senior White House Correspondent Peter Doocy asks President Trump what’s behind his desire to save TikTok after once viewing the popular app as a spy agent for China.
President Trump chose to delay the ban on TikTok for 75 days in an executive order Monday, marking one of his first actions in his new administration.
Trump signed the order from the Oval Office hours after he was inaugurated for his second term. The move comes days after the Supreme Court upheld the ban.
The order also arrived a few days after TikTok briefly disconnected for U.S. users, and after Trump signaled he wanted to keep the app accessible, even though it’s not entirely owned by a U.S. company.
In his decree, Trump wrote that he has “sole constitutional responsibility for the national security of the United States, the conduct of foreign policy, and other vital executive functions.”
TRUMP SAYS HE WILL ‘MOST LIKELY’ GIVE TIKTOK A 90-DAY EXTENSION TO AVOID BAN
Trump signed an executive order on Monday regarding the impending ban on TikTok. (Getty Images/Getty Images)
“To fulfill these responsibilities, I intend to consult with my advisors, including the heads of relevant departments and agencies, on the national security concerns posed by TikTok, and to pursue a resolution that protect national security while saving a platform used by 170 million Americans,” Trump said. “My administration must also review sensitive intelligence related to these concerns and evaluate the sufficiency of the mitigation measures taken by TikTok to date.”
Trump added that he had ordered Pam Bondi, his nominee for U.S. attorney general, to suspend all enforcement of the ban for 75 days, which would give the Trump administration “an opportunity to determine appropriate course of action regarding TikTok.”
“Because of the national security interests at stake and because section 2(d) of the Act vests investigative and enforcement authority solely in the Attorney General, any attempt at enforcement by States or private parties represents an encroachment on the powers of the Executive,” the order adds. “The Attorney General will exercise all available authority to preserve and defend the exclusive power of the executive branch to enforce the law.”
In an exchange with Fox News senior White House correspondent Peter Doocy on Monday, Trump said TikTok’s future “depends on the deal” and that the United States “should have the right to get half of TikTok”.
POTENTIAL TIKTOK BAN: WHICH SOCIAL MEDIA APPS APPEAR IN APP STORES
United States Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, not pictured, administers the oath of office to President-elect Donald Trump during the 60th Presidential Inauguration in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC, Monday, January 20, 2025. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images/Bloomberg via Getty Images/Getty Images)
“You and your team members were now accustomed to warning about the dangers of TikTok spying on Americans,” Doocy told the president. “What’s changed that makes you not worry about that anymore?”
“I can not make the deal or I can do it,” Trump responded. “TikTok is worthless, worthless if I don’t approve it, it has to be done…if I make the deal it’s worth maybe a trillion dollars. A trillion. So if I make the deal, I’m talking about doing it for the good.” UNITED STATES.”
In a unanimous ruling on Friday, the Supreme Court upheld the ban on TikTok and highlighted its concern over the app’s “relationship with a foreign adversary.”
“There is no doubt that, for more than 170 million Americans, TikTok provides a distinctive and expansive means of expression, a means of engagement, and a source of community,” the court wrote in the ruling. “But Congress has determined that divestment is necessary to address its well-founded national security concerns about TikTok’s data collection practices and its dealings with a foreign adversary.”
The TikTok logo is visible in this illustration. Trump delayed banning TikTok for 75 years. (Jaap Arriens/NurPhoto via Getty Images / Getty Images)
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE
“For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the challenged provisions do not violate Petitioners’ First Amendment rights. The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is affirmed.”
