I'd rather you expound what what part you don't agree with, because what that link tells us is that the DoJ didn't consider that severe enough to push for a ban on the product.
It doesn't surprise me that they don't care, setting policy for forward looking national security matters isn't their job.
The part I disagree with is the idea that "they're using the app to spy on us" is a benchmark that some in the government care about, or a reasonable benchmark at that.
On this topic there are often people asking for evidence that TikTok has done anything wrong, but that's really besides the whole point. Governance can be an issue whether or not someone has abused a power. Past performance is not the be-all and end-all of security; means and motivations are also something to consider.
Wait, hold up, you're saying that the DoJ, which is definitely "some in government" (because congress is not government, it's just one part of the government, there are many more parts) don't use the law as their benchmark?
Because that would be literally the opposite of reality O_o
The question is around whether the DoJ can make things stick, and the DoJ doesn't waste its time, and doesn't burn its budget, on cases they know they can't make stick.