By Brian Shillhavy | Source
Last night the House of Representatives approved the bill to stop the U.S. Government from shutting down, and Elon Musk came out the big winner (Donald Trump – not so much), by getting two provisions removed that would have hurt his companies and potentially reduced much of his wealth.
The only thing that the House did not agree to was Trump’s desire to raise the debt ceiling for two years, which would have pushed it off until the mid-term elections in 2026.
But now we get to go through this whole show again in a few weeks at the beginning of March, 2025.
The one provision that was killed and that so far I have not seen anyone in the media ask “why?”, was the removal of the widely popular “Take it Down Act” which had bipartisan support, would protect children from being sexually abused online from pornography developed through AI without their consent, and had already passed the Senate by a unanimous vote.
It was in the original bill that was set to be approved before Musk used his X bully pulpit to stop it.
The other thing Musk was successful in removing, was a provision to limit Tech investments in China.
Restricting investments in China
Also stripped from the bill was a provision that would have limited US investments in China, particularly in the technology sector.
Democrats have slammed the removal of the measure, arguing that its absence would benefit Elon Musk, who helped derail the bipartisan package on Wednesday.
“Musk’s investments in China, and ties with its government, have only grown over the last few years – alongside his growing involvement in American politics,” Rep. Rosa DeLauro, ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee, wrote in a letter Friday to congressional leaders.
“It is no surprise, then, that ‘President’ Musk does not want to see a funding deal containing this provision be signed into law,” she wrote.
The measure would have “prevented wealthy investors from continuing to offshore production and US intellectual property into China,” she wrote. (Source.)
What is the “Take it Down” Act?
U.S. Senator Ted Cruz introduced the Tools to Address Known Exploitation by Immobilizing Technological Deepfakes on Websites and Networks (Take It Down) Act.
The bill aims to protect and empower victims of non-consensual intimate image abuse — also known as “revenge pornography.”
The bill would criminalize the publication of non-consensual intimate imagery, including AI-generated pornography, and require social media and similar websites to have in place procedures to remove such content upon notification from a victim.
Sens. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn.; Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo.; Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.; Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va.; Jacky Rosen, D-Nev.; Ted Budd, R-N.C.; Laphonza Butler, D-Calif.; Todd Young, R-Ind.; Joe Manchin, I-W.Va.; John Hickenlooper, D-Colo.; Bill Cassidy, R-La. and Martin Heinrich, D-N. Mex., are also co-authors of this legislation.
Here are some other key points the bill aims to prevent:
-
The bill makes it unlawful for a person to knowingly publish or threaten to publish non-consensual intimate imagery on social media and other online platforms.
-
The bill permits the good faith disclosure of non-consensual intimate imagery, such as to law enforcement or for medical treatment.
-
Social media and other websites would be required to have in place procedures to remove “revenge porn,” pursuant to a valid request from a victim, within 48 hours. Websites must also make reasonable efforts to remove copies of the images.
The bill passed the Senate by a unanimous vote a few weeks ago, and its supporters were urging the House to pass it before recessing for Christmas.
Here are two short videos talking about The Act, and the hope that the House would pass it before recessing for Christmas.
The House was just about to pass the CR Spending Bill to prevent the government from shutting down earlier this week, and the “Take it Down Act” was included.
But then Elon Musk intervened, got Trump to support him, and the “Take it Down Act” was removed.
Since this bill would cost taxpayers ZERO money, why is nobody asking Elon Musk why he insisted this provision be removed?
Is it because X and other tech companies would have to foot the bill to implement this, and also have to spend money hiring attorneys to fight the avalanche of lawsuits that would probably result?
So we had a bill with bipartisan support that had already passed the Senate unanimously, and where thousands of highschoolers across the country were campaigning to get the House to pass this before Christmas, and just like that, Musk killed it, with Trump’s approval, protecting Big Tech so that they would not be held responsible and accountable for child pornography and child sex exploitation on Social Media platforms.
And Republicans cheered, thanking Musk for his “leadership.”
Wyoming Delegation Votes To Avoid Shutdown, Praises Trump And Musk’s Leadership
Wyoming’s congressional delegation voted to pass a temporary spending measure Friday night that will keep the federal government from shutting down.
Cynthia Lummis praised Donald Trump and Elon Musk for exhibiting leadership while Biden didn’t. (Source.)
MAGA!
How do you verify a child without verifying ALL people?
I would reject any bill asking me to verify.
I want LESS government.
ThE GovErNmEnT MuSt saaaaaaaaveeeee me!
– Author
The ‘Take It Down Act’ protects children and other innocents from this growing form of online abuse.
The online Media companies run by billionaires resist anything impinging on their freedom to post whatever gets more clicks, no matter how deceptive or cruel.
Please let’s not lose sight of the forest for the trees.
I say this author is being ‘cruel and deceptive’ towards Trump and Musk to earn clicks. How about that?
Trump and Musk are infinitely richer and more powerful than regular citizens like us. We and our children need more protection than they do.
Thanks to Mr. Shillhavy for speaking truth to power. Also to Susan for her excellent Comment here.
I don’t think it’s ok to be cruel and deceptive against people who have a lot more money and power than us just because of that. It’s a petty argument.
Actually, I don’t think it’s OK to be cruel and deceptive to anyone, rich or poor.
My point is just that the powerful can protect themselves better.
We all need sensible guardrails to rein in the worst excesses of Social media.
I don’t think you understand my concern. If this bill was designed to try legally protecting raging pedophiles from public exposure by trying to mix them with ‘victimized teenagers’ feeling judged by society, the best way to protect us and our children would be rejecting it.
Brian SHILLhavy
Could be something could be nothing, but Shill-Heavy is kind of a red flag.
Also, it was meant to be a “spending” bill not a “law bill” also, Musk didn’t kill it, X posted it online and the population tore it apart. Also, it was written 9 months ago by The Firm, and only shown to members on the day of the vote, so the day X posted it was the first day for most members to see it, they had no time to read it by design, X removed the design.
That said, SHILL – Heavy, could be something could be nothing. : )
What I love about the whole spending bill thing is that musk and trump are going to cut 2 trillion from the budget but they need the debt ceiling raised! 🤣
You better believe the billions that musk gets in government subsidies isn’t going to get cut.
And in contrast to the campaign talk about not touching SS payments, now it’s being discussed. Why? When SS is entirely funded by us and involves absolutely zero debt spending? It doesn’t even come out of the budget. It’s not entitlement, it’s a right and a promise made to us when they took it out of our paycheck.
What I’m curious about is how fast are the billionaires going to get additional permanent tax cuts, and are they going to make our middle class tax cuts, which are scheduled to sunset this year, permanent too?
The madness continues. I don’t endorse violence, yet I totally understand the Eat the Rich sentiment (French Revolution) and motive that drove Luigi to murder.
You can bet that Biden or Democrats would never cut any projects that funnel money back to any of their organisations, called money laundering.
Why did Luigi kill Brian T?
Obama made the laws, the health care system, do you support killing him too?
How about the companies that makes people sick in the first place, like medicine and toxic food, do you support killing those CEO.
Can I kill those that I find make my life less joyful?, can we all do that?, or did we evolve to a higher place?.
Well I can see we did not all do that.
Btw… Brian T was a poor guy that worked his way to be CEO. Luigi is a rich kid, whos familly owns a nursery chain. Biased perhaps.
the author of this article . is an example of a perfectly disguised enemy of America , and humanity at large ,
allowing he / she /it a pulpit , here should serve as a good exercise in discernment and critical thinking !!!
practice Your discernment !!!
jay w
No mr. Shill, I think the bill was another legal tool to try and protect famous pedophiles from exposure.
AI was only disclosed by higher ups to try claiming certain videos are fake.
Gray hats were MORONS to let it come to this and capitalize by risking our rights for so long, but their fault is a lot smaller than the sex traffic consumers, enablers and useful-idiot-journalists.