Tyb
https://twitter.com/SEVENTEEN76777/status/1452124066723373056
You are grounded for two days!
https://twitter.com/SEVENTEEN76777/status/1452123286746320907
wat?
Holy Truth
@HolyTruth8
·
6h
IS THIS A ]MASK[ FREE EVENT???
THE JUAN & ONLY—107 #JuanOSavin
LIVE & IN PERSON TONIGHT 7:30 PST #PATRIOTDOUBLEDOWN
#BOOTSONTHEGROUND #EVERYONESFAVORITECOWBOY
107Editor
@107Editor
Replying to
@HolyTruth8
The fella in the black cowboy hat isn’t #JuanOSavin but ya’ll will be seeing Juan soon.
https://twitter.com/107Editor/status/1452059009192714242
You have two eyes.
kek
so I'm not a digital solider, big deal
saing
A term that is short for the expression "know what I'm saying." Often used in Interrogatory or affirmative phrases.
Proce
noun: this term refers to a typo in a text message.
Ignore that last proce. What I meant to say was….
because you never say anything worth while, your fault
Ron Watkins [CodeMonkeyZ], [24.10.21 02:37]
[ Photo ]
I spent hours discussing technology with Mr. Wiebe and picking his brain. He is so genuine and among the most knowledgeable people on our planet.
https://t.me/CodeMonkeyZ/1958
Trump Supporters Channel 🇺🇸, [24.10.21 01:01]
Baldwin's response to killing a woman is utterly insane.
https://saferead.org/trumpchannel/trending-news/alec-baldwin-insane-response-7299262
https://t.me/TrumpChannel/2263
Alec Baldwin Reportedly Accidentally Kills Woman With Prop Gun On Set Of Movie
Actor Alec Baldwin accidentally shot and killed a woman, and wounded a man, on the set of a new movie and his reaction to the tragedy has apparently leaked to the press.
The actor repeatedly asked “why was I handed a hot gun?” after the tragic shooting, The Daily Mail reported.
Halyna Hutchins, 42, died shortly after being shot by Baldwin around 1.50pm Thursday at Bonanza Creek Ranch, near the city of Santa Fe in New Mexico. Joel Souza, 48, the film’s director, was also hurt and spent several hours in hospital, but was released later the same evening.
Police have disclosed few details about the shooting, saying only that a ‘projectile’ was fired by a ‘prop gun’ and they are investigating. A spokesman for the movie’s production company later said that accident involved ‘the misfire of a prop gun loaded with blanks’.
A witness told Hollywood gossip site Showbiz 411 that Baldwin immediately began asking why he was handed a ‘hot gun’ – which typically means a gun loaded with real ammunition – after the shooting.
This is not the first time someone was killed on a movie set with a “hot gun.” The most famous case being that of actor Brandon Lee, the son of Bruce Lee, on the set of “The Crow” in 1993.
“There should have been blanks in the gun, the on-set armorer’s job is to check that before handing the weapon over,” Mike Tristan, 60, a Hollywood armorer with three decades of experience, said.
“They then make sure that the actor stands on a mark and never points the gun at the crew or cast… the editing makes it seem like they were pointing at their co-actor,” he said.
‘That’s why everyone in the industry is very confused,” he said. “How this happened is a total mystery at the moment.”
Director James Cullen Bressack said after the tragedy that he will never use blanks on the set of any of his movies again.
“I will never use anything but airsoft and rubber guns on my movies ever again. This should never have happened. Halyna, you were a gem,” he said. “This is so f****d up.”
There were many reactions to the tragedy from Hollywood stars.
“The entire cast and crew has been absolutely devastated by today’s tragedy, and we send our deepest condolences to Halyna’s family and loved ones,” a spokesperson for Rust Movies Production LLC said to Deadline.
“We have halted production on the film for an undetermined period of time and are fully cooperating with the Santa Fe Police Department’s investigation,” the spokesman said. “We will be providing counseling services to everyone connected to the film as we work to process this awful event.”
“Our hearts go out to the family of Halyna Hutchins and to Joel Souza and all involved in the incident on ‘Rust’. No one should ever be killed by a gun on a film set. Period,” the family of Brandon Lee said.
Our hearts go out to the family of Halyna Hutchins and to Joel Souza and all involved in the incident on “Rust”. No one should ever be killed by a gun on a film set. Period. 💔
— Brandon Bruce Lee (@brandonblee) October 22, 2021
“Absolutely horrifying and devastating news about cinematographer, Halyna Hutchins. My heart goes out to her family,” actor Elijah Wood said on Twitter.
Absolutely horrifying and devastating news about cinematographer, Halyna Hutchins. My heart goes out to her family.
— Elijah Wood (@elijahwood) October 22, 2021
“My greatest fear is that someone will be fatally hurt on one of my sets. I pray this will never happen. My heart goes out to all of those affected by the tragedy today on Rust, especially Halyna Hutchins & her family,” director James Gunn said.
My greatest fear is that someone will be fatally hurt on one of my sets. I pray this will never happen. My heart goes out to all of those affected by the tragedy today on Rust, especially Halyna Hutchins & her family.
— James Gunn (@JamesGunn) October 22, 2021
“Deepest condolences to the family and friends of Halyna Hutchins. Crew should never be unsafe on set and when they are there is always a clearly definable reason why. #IASolidarity,” actor and director Alex Winter said.
Deepest condolences to the family and friends of Halyna Hutchins. Crew should never be unsafe on set and when they are there is always a clearly definable reason why. #IASolidarity
— Alex Winter (@Winter) October 22, 2021
No criminal charges have been filed but a criminal investigation into the tragedy is ongoing.
“’According to investigators, it appears that the scene being filmed involved the use of a prop firearm when it was discharged,” sheriff’s spokesman Juan Rios said. “Detectives are investigating how and what type of projectile was discharged.”
“The incident remains an active investigation. As more information becomes available, updates will be provided,” he said.
https://conservativebrief.com/alec-baldwin-53130
Brian Cates - Political Columnist, [23.10.21 11:51]
[Forwarded from Kriss]
[ Photo ]
https://t.me/drawandstrikechannel/16930
Brian Cates - Political Columnist, [23.10.21 11:52]
☝️☝️☝️Pay attention to the next post below. I’m going to SHOW YOU the Executive Order this person I’d referring to.
https://t.me/drawandstrikechannel/16931
Brian Cates - Political Columnist, [23.10.21 11:53]
[ Photo ]
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/09/14/2018-20203/imposing-certain-sanctions-in-the-event-of-foreign-interference-in-a-united-states-election
https://t.me/drawandstrikechannel/16932
Brian Cates - Political Columnist, [23.10.21 11:59]
[Forwarded from Brian Cates - Discussion Group]
You know every explanation proffered by Biden and others to explain the backlog - “we don’t have enuff cranes, of truck drivers, no wait it’s COVID,etc. etc.!” is bullshit, right?
https://t.me/drawandstrikechannel/16933
Brian Cates - Political Columnist, [23.10.21 11:59]
So don’t be to quick to dismiss this.
https://t.me/drawandstrikechannel/16934
Brian Cates - Political Columnist, [23.10.21 12:02]
A lot of people ALREADY SETTLED on a narrative that the globalist cabal is doing this themselves as part of the Great Reset strategy. Biden is fully in control and lying about why he’s keeping all those cargo ships circling around out there.
https://t.me/drawandstrikechannel/16936
Brian Cates - Political Columnist, [23.10.21 12:06]
You cannot reverse a previous President’s EO’s involving a national emergency while that national emergency is ongoing. You also cannot reverse the previous President’s PEAD’s. Biden will NEVER come out and admit his hands are tied, he has to do this. Instead he and his impotent administration are forced to mumble one lame excuse after another.
https://t.me/drawandstrikechannel/16936
Brian Cates - Political Columnist, [23.10.21 12:14]
To reverse Trump’s EO’s signed and instituted and triggered into operational status by a national emergency, Biden would have to declare an end to the COVID pandemic. I’m pretty sure one of PEAD’s Trump signed involved his successor not being allowed by the military to reveal the election interference EO has become active. So Biden hasn’t declared an end to the national emergency because he can’t. Also, I’m pretty sure behind the scenes Trump’s EO on election interference being triggered activated several PEAD’s Trump signed that the Democrats in Congress are still trying get information about with their 1/6 commission subpoenaing Trump and Bannon. They will never get the information they’re frantically trying to uncover.
https://t.me/drawandstrikechannel/16937=
Brian Cates - Political Columnist, [23.10.21 12:27]
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/trumps-emergency-powers-worry-senators-legal-experts-70718059
https://t.me/drawandstrikechannel/16938
Brian Cates - Political Columnist, [23.10.21 12:41]
[Forwarded from Brian Cates - Discussion Group]
WHILE A NATIONAL EMERGENCY IS ONGOING any EO’s or PEAD’s made directly relating to that national emergency cannot be reversed by an incoming administration. Learn how this actually works. Don’t just believe shit some media talking head told you. RESEARCH IT. Those of you who keeping asking for explanations about all the weird shit we’re watching Biden and Garland either do or allow, I’m TELLING you what the reason is. They do it because they have to. The military was given standing orders during a national emergency. As long as that national emergency is in effect -and it still is- Biden is not a fucking king. PEAD’s and EO’s enforced secretly by the military, the courts, and Congress tightly control him. He has to do certain things and is prevented from doing other things. And nobody in Biden’s administration can reveal any of this. He can’t publicly say why he and Garland haven’t shut down Durham or Weiss.
https://t.me/drawandstrikechannel/16939
Brian Cates - Political Columnist, [23.10.21 13:00]
Counterpoint: what you’re saying here about Trump and national emergency EO’s and PEAD’s is so explosive, if true, there is no way it would not have leaked. Counter-counterpoint: Durham and other US Attorneys were SPYING ON SOME MOST POWERFUL MEMBERS OF CONGRESS for more than THREE YEARS via federal grand juries issuing search/surveillance warrants for all their phone calls, text messages, and emails and it never leaked. Durham revealed last month he used grand juries to subpoena records from Hillary Clinton’s lawyers, the DNC, Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS for evidence that will allow Durham to prove in the courtroom they manufactured both the Steele Dossier and the Alfa Bank hoaxes before handing them off to federal officials. Durham beat them all in secret grand jury court proceedings that likely lasted more than a year. A truly epic legal battle between The Witch and The Prosecutor. And the prosecutor won. And he until he dropped that indictment on Sussmann, NONE OF THAT LEAKED. So claiming there would have been leaks isn’t the strong counter point you think it is.
https://t.me/drawandstrikechannel/16941
Trump's emergency powers worry some senators, legal experts
President Donald Trump's emergency powers are worrying senators and legal experts
By DEB RIECHMANN Associated Press
May 16, 2020, 9:12 PM
• 6 min read
WASHINGTON – The day he declared the COVID-19 pandemic a national emergency, President Donald Trump made a cryptic offhand remark.
“I have the right to do a lot of things that people don’t even know about," he said at the White House.
Trump wasn’t just crowing. Dozens of statutory authorities become available to any president when national emergencies are declared. They are rarely used, but Trump last month stunned legal experts and others when he claimed — mistakenly — that he has “total” authority over governors in easing COVID-19 guidelines.
That prompted 10 senators to look into how sweeping Trump believes his emergency powers are.
They have asked to see this administration's Presidential Emergency Action Documents, or PEADs. The little-known, classified documents are essentially planning papers.
The documents don’t give a president authority beyond what's in the Constitution. But they outline what powers a president believes that the Constitution gives him to deal with national emergencies. The senators think the documents would provide them a window into how this White House interprets presidential emergency powers.
“Somebody needs to look at these things,” Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, said in a telephone interview. “This is a case where the president can declare an emergency and then say, ‘Because there’s an emergency, I can do this, this and this.’"
King, seven Democrats and one Republican sent a letter late last month to acting national intelligence director Richard Grenell asking to be briefed on any existing PEADs. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., wrote a similar letter to Attorney General William Barr and White House counsel Pat Cipollone.
“The concern is that there could be actions taken that would violate individual rights under the Constitution," such as limiting due process, unreasonable search and seizure and holding individuals without cause, King said.
“I’m merely speculating. It may be that we get these documents and there’s nothing untoward in their checks and balances and everything is above board and reasonable.''
Joshua Geltzer, visiting professor of law at Georgetown University, said there is a push to take a look at these documents because there is rising distrust for the Trump administration's legal interpretations in a way he hasn't seen in his lifetime.
The most publicized example was Trump’s decision last year to declare the security situation along the U.S.-Mexico border a national emergency. That decision allowed him to take up to $3.6 billion from military construction projects to finance wall construction beyond the miles that lawmakers had been willing to fund. Trump’s move skirted the authority of Congress, which by law has the power to spend money in the nation’s wallet.
“I worry about other things he might call an emergency,” Geltzer said. “I think around the election itself in November — that’s where there seems to be a lot of potential for mischief with this president.”
The lawmakers made their request just days after Trump made his startling claim on April 13 that he had the authority to force states to reopen for business amid the pandemic.
The lawmakers made their request just days after Trump made his startling claim on April 13 that he had the authority to force states to reopen for business amid the pandemic.
“When somebody’s the president of the United States, the authority is total,” Trump said, causing a backlash from some governors and legal experts. Trump later tweeted that while some people say it's the governors, not the president's decision, "Let it be fully understood that this is incorrect.”
Trump later backtracked on his claim of “total" authority and agreed that states have the upper hand in deciding when to end their lockdowns. But it was just the latest from a president who has been stretching existing statutory authorities “to, if not beyond, their breaking point," said Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas.
Questions about Trump's PEADs went unanswered by the Justice Department, National Security Council and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of a national security program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, said PEADs have not been subject to congressional oversight for decades. She estimates that there are 50 to 60 of these documents, which include draft proclamations, executive orders and proposed legislation that could be swiftly introduced to “assert broad presidential authority” in national emergencies.
She said the Eisenhower administration had PEADs outlining how it might respond to a possible Soviet nuclear attack. According to the Brennan Center, PEADs issued up through the 1970s included detention of U.S. citizens suspected of being subversives, warrantless searches and seizures and the imposition of martial law.
“A Department of Justice memorandum from the Lyndon B. Johnson administration discusses a presidential emergency action document that would impose censorship on news sent abroad,” Goitein wrote in an op-ed with lawyer Andrew Boyle published last month in The New York Times.
"The memo notes that while no ‘express statutory authority’ exists for such a measure, ‘it can be argued that these actions would be legal in the aftermath of a devastating nuclear attack based on the president’s constitutional powers to preserve the national security.”’
Goitein said she especially worries about any orders having to do with military deployment, including martial law.
“You can imagine a situation where he (Trump) engineers a crisis that leads to domestic violence, which then becomes a pretext for martial law,” said Goitein, who insists she's simply playing out worst-case scenarios.
She said she wonders if there is a PEAD outlining steps the president could take to respond to a serious cyberattack. Would the president aggressively interpret telecommunications law and flip an internet kill switch, or restrain domestic internet traffic? she asks.
Bobby Chesney, associate dean at the University of Texas School of Law, said some fears might be exaggerated because while Trump makes off-the-cuff assertions of authority far beyond past presidents, he doesn't necessarily follow up with action.
Says Chesney: “His actions don’t match the rhetoric always — or even often.”
———
This story has been corrected by deleting Goitein quote beginning, “What I worry about …” because of a misunderstanding over its context.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/trumps-emergency-powers-worry-senators-legal-experts-70718059
Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election
A Presidential Document by the Executive Office of the President on 09/14/2018
Executive Order 13848 of September 12, 2018
Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) (NEA), section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,
I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, find that the ability of persons located, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States to interfere in or undermine public confidence in United States elections, including through the unauthorized accessing of election and campaign infrastructure or the covert distribution of propaganda and disinformation, constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. Although there has been no evidence of a foreign power altering the outcome or vote tabulation in any United States election, foreign powers have historically sought to exploit America's free and open political system. In recent years, the proliferation of digital devices and internet-based communications has created significant vulnerabilities and magnified the scope and intensity of the threat of foreign interference, as illustrated in the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with this threat.
Accordingly, I hereby order:
Section 1. (a) Not later than 45 days after the conclusion of a United States election, the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the heads of any other appropriate executive departments and agencies (agencies), shall conduct an assessment of any information indicating that a foreign government, or any person acting as an agent of or on behalf of a foreign government, has acted with the intent or purpose of interfering in that election. The assessment shall identify, to the maximum extent ascertainable, the nature of any foreign interference and any methods employed to execute it, the persons involved, and the foreign government or governments that authorized, directed, sponsored, or supported it. The Director of National Intelligence shall deliver this assessment and appropriate supporting information to the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security.
(b) Within 45 days of receiving the assessment and information described in section 1(a) of this order, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the heads of any other appropriate agencies and, as appropriate, State and local officials, shall deliver to the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Secretary of Defense a report evaluating, with respect to the United States election that is the subject of the assessment described in section 1(a):
(i) the extent to which any foreign interference that targeted election infrastructure materially affected the security or integrity of that infrastructure, the tabulation of votes, or the timely transmission of election results; and
(ii) if any foreign interference involved activities targeting the infrastructure of, or pertaining to, a political organization, campaign, or candidate, the Start Printed Page 46844extent to which such activities materially affected the security or integrity of that infrastructure, including by unauthorized access to, disclosure or threatened disclosure of, or alteration or falsification of, information or data.
The report shall identify any material issues of fact with respect to these matters that the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security are unable to evaluate or reach agreement on at the time the report is submitted. The report shall also include updates and recommendations, when appropriate, regarding remedial actions to be taken by the United States Government, other than the sanctions described in sections 2 and 3 of this order.
(c) Heads of all relevant agencies shall transmit to the Director of National Intelligence any information relevant to the execution of the Director's duties pursuant to this order, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law. If relevant information emerges after the submission of the report mandated by section 1(a) of this order, the Director, in consultation with the heads of any other appropriate agencies, shall amend the report, as appropriate, and the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall amend the report required by section 1(b), as appropriate.
(d) Nothing in this order shall prevent the head of any agency or any other appropriate official from tendering to the President, at any time through an appropriate channel, any analysis, information, assessment, or evaluation of foreign interference in a United States election.
(e) If information indicating that foreign interference in a State, tribal, or local election within the United States has occurred is identified, it may be included, as appropriate, in the assessment mandated by section 1(a) of this order or in the report mandated by section 1(b) of this order, or submitted to the President in an independent report.
(f) Not later than 30 days following the date of this order, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence shall develop a framework for the process that will be used to carry out their respective responsibilities pursuant to this order. The framework, which may be classified in whole or in part, shall focus on ensuring that agencies fulfill their responsibilities pursuant to this order in a manner that maintains methodological consistency; protects law enforcement or other sensitive information and intelligence sources and methods; maintains an appropriate separation between intelligence functions and policy and legal judgments; ensures that efforts to protect electoral processes and institutions are insulated from political bias; and respects the principles of free speech and open debate.
Sec. 2. (a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any foreign person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security:
(i) to have directly or indirectly engaged in, sponsored, concealed, or otherwise been complicit in foreign interference in a United States election;
(ii) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, any activity described in subsection (a)(i) of this section or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or
(iii) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property or interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.
(b) Executive Order 13694 of April 1, 2015, as amended by Executive Order 13757 of December 28, 2016, remains in effect. This order is not Start Printed Page 46845intended to, and does not, serve to limit the Secretary of the Treasury's discretion to exercise the authorities provided in Executive Order 13694. Where appropriate, the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, may exercise the authorities described in Executive Order 13694 or other authorities in conjunction with the Secretary of the Treasury's exercise of authorities provided in this order.
(c) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section apply except to the extent provided by statutes, or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the date of this order.
Sec. 3. Following the transmission of the assessment mandated by section 1(a) and the report mandated by section 1(b):
(a) the Secretary of the Treasury shall review the assessment mandated by section 1(a) and the report mandated by section 1(b), and, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security, impose all appropriate sanctions pursuant to section 2(a) of this order and any appropriate sanctions described in section 2(b) of this order; and
(b) the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the heads of other appropriate agencies, shall jointly prepare a recommendation for the President as to whether additional sanctions against foreign persons may be appropriate in response to the identified foreign interference and in light of the evaluation in the report mandated by section 1(b) of this order, including, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, proposed sanctions with respect to the largest business entities licensed or domiciled in a country whose government authorized, directed, sponsored, or supported election interference, including at least one entity from each of the following sectors: financial services, defense, energy, technology, and transportation (or, if inapplicable to that country's largest business entities, sectors of comparable strategic significance to that foreign government). The recommendation shall include an assessment of the effect of the recommended sanctions on the economic and national security interests of the United States and its allies. Any recommended sanctions shall be appropriately calibrated to the scope of the foreign interference identified, and may include one or more of the following with respect to each targeted foreign person:
(i) blocking and prohibiting all transactions in a person's property and interests in property subject to United States jurisdiction;
(ii) export license restrictions under any statute or regulation that requires the prior review and approval of the United States Government as a condition for the export or re-export of goods or services;
(iii) prohibitions on United States financial institutions making loans or providing credit to a person;
(iv) restrictions on transactions in foreign exchange in which a person has any interest;
(v) prohibitions on transfers of credit or payments between financial institutions, or by, through, or to any financial institution, for the benefit of a person;
(vi) prohibitions on United States persons investing in or purchasing equity or debt of a person;
(vii) exclusion of a person's alien corporate officers from the United States;
(viii) imposition on a person's alien principal executive officers of any of the sanctions described in this section; or
(ix) any other measures authorized by law.
Sec. 4. I hereby determine that the making of donations of the type of articles specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(2)) by, Start Printed Page 46846to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in this order, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 2 of this order.
Sec. 5. The prohibitions in section 2 of this order include the following:
(a) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; and
(b) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.
Sec. 6. I hereby find that the unrestricted immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of such persons. Such persons shall be treated as persons covered by section 1 of Proclamation 8693 of July 24, 2011 (Suspension of Entry of Aliens Subject to United Nations Security Council Travel Bans and International Emergency Economic Powers Act Sanctions).
Sec. 7. (a) Any transaction that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.
(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.
Sec. 8. For the purposes of this order:
(a) the term “person” means an individual or entity;
(b) the term “entity” means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization;
(c) the term “United States person” means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person (including a foreign person) in the United States;
(d) the term “election infrastructure” means information and communications technology and systems used by or on behalf of the Federal Government or a State or local government in managing the election process, including voter registration databases, voting machines, voting tabulation equipment, and equipment for the secure transmission of election results;
(e) the term “United States election” means any election for Federal office held on, or after, the date of this order;
(f) the term “foreign interference,” with respect to an election, includes any covert, fraudulent, deceptive, or unlawful actions or attempted actions of a foreign government, or of any person acting as an agent of or on behalf of a foreign government, undertaken with the purpose or effect of influencing, undermining confidence in, or altering the result or reported result of, the election, or undermining public confidence in election processes or institutions;
(g) the term “foreign government” means any national, state, provincial, or other governing authority, any political party, or any official of any governing authority or political party, in each case of a country other than the United States;
(h) the term “covert,” with respect to an action or attempted action, means characterized by an intent or apparent intent that the role of a foreign government will not be apparent or acknowledged publicly; and
(i) the term “State” means the several States or any of the territories, dependencies, or possessions of the United States.
Sec. 9. For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence Start Printed Page 46847in the United States, I find that because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render those measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in this order, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section 2 of this order.
Sec. 10. Nothing in this order shall prohibit transactions for the conduct of the official business of the United States Government by employees, grantees, or contractors thereof.
Sec. 11. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may re-delegate any of these functions to other officers within the Department of the Treasury consistent with applicable law. All agencies of the United States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of this order.
Sec. 12. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to submit the recurring and final reports to the Congress on the national emergency declared in this order, consistent with section 401(c) of the NEA (50 U.S.C. 1641(c)) and section 204(c) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1703(c)).
Sec. 13. This order shall be implemented consistent with 50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(1) and (3).
Sec. 14. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
Start Printed Page 46848
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
THE WHITE HOUSE, September 12, 2018. Filed 9-13-18; 11:15 am]
[FR Doc. 2018-20203
Billing code 3295-F8-P
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/09/14/2018-20203/imposing-certain-sanctions-in-the-event-of-foreign-interference-in-a-united-states-election
Ron Watkins
[CodeMonkeyZ], [23.10.21 11:37]
Just finished a pleasant interview with Stephanie Hegarty from the BBC.
I told them Trump won and the election needs to be decertified.
https://t.me/CodeMonkeyZ/1955
Summary
Biden would have to declare an end to the COVID pandemic.
So Biden hasn’t declared an end to the national emergency because he can’t. Also, I’m pretty sure behind the scenes Trump’s EO on election interference being triggered activated several PEAD’s Trump signed that the Democrats in Congress are still trying get information about with their 1/6 commission subpoenaing Trump and Bannon. They will never get the information they’re frantically trying to uncover.
Distraction, who cares