Trump's initial appearance on TikTok while still in the White House sparks speculation about the ban's possible reconsideration.

The deadline for TikTok's divestment has been extended until September 17, casting doubt on whether a ban will ever truly happen. This decision has fueled suspicion of political utility over long-term security concerns.

The extension of the deadline has frustrated lawmakers who argue the administration is ignoring its national security obligations. The White House has launched an official TikTok account, which serves as a platform for President Trump's messaging. For the president, TikTok has become less a security liability and more a political asset.

The account, which belongs to the Trump administration, was first introduced to the public with a post featuring President Donald Trump. TikTok now has a seat at the table in the Oval Office's communication playbook, reaching an estimated 170 million American users.

The White House TikTok account is central to President Trump's electoral strategy, and its future management will be determined internally by the White House communications team or related official governmental bodies. Specific details on where it will be established or hosted have not been publicly disclosed.

The reality is different: TikTok is not only alive and well in the U.S., but its future may determine the credibility of U.S. policy on digital security and foreign influence. Each extension buys more time for negotiations with U.S. investors.

However, the cost of removing TikTok grows steeper, not just in terms of user backlash, but in political communication strategy. Lawmakers accuse the White House of undermining Congress's authority and sending mixed messages about national defense. The account's proven centrality to the president's electoral strategy adds to these concerns.

The TikTok law mandates TikTok's sale to U.S. investors or a complete ban by January 2025. As the deadline approaches, the future of TikTok in the U.S. remains uncertain, raising questions about the credibility of a potential nationwide ban and the long-term security implications of its continued presence.