The following section appears to apply for anyone (or group) actually or conspiring to help anyone in Section 1 & 2. This would include, for example, governors blocking the immigration clamp-down. Their assets can be siezed.

Am I correct about this?

—

Sec. 5. (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.

>>170791

OH SHIT.

FEDS can sieze the property of any company or business/individual hiring illegal aliens!

Appears to be a typo. It doesn't make sense with any alternate meaning I'm aware of.

>>170845

>hteses

WAT

Executive Order Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption

This is incredibly broad. Basically, they could shut down ALL organizations that deal with any money shown to be pay-for-play. Like…the entire DNC.

>>170816

Elon Musk status change? What happened?

>>170867

Any competent lawyer would just say that. They HATE wording problems like this. I really think it is just a typo. Should have read 'or'.

>>170917

Have any evidence to convince anyone otherwise? Yes, it appears the White House made a typo. It isn't beyond the realm of possibility. They're human.

>>170920

Ok, this makes sense. Very awkward wording, but OK.

>>170940

Yeah, in theory, contributions to politicians - if they keep anything in their campaign fund afterward - are subject to this.

>>170946

Yeah, I see that now. Incredibly awkward. I'm familiar with legalese - this is poorly written, IMO. But hey…it woudln't be the first time I've seen absolute shit for legislative wording. (I've seen FAR worse.)

Ignore.

>>170953

Yes, this thing is incredibly broad. They can basically follow the trail of corruption and nuke any organization it touches.

>>170962

I think they already are.

When I first read this EO, I saw the incredibly broad wording and knew what it would enable. All we've seen since verifies what Q is hinting at. They just need to reveal it to the people in a way that doesn't make Trump look like he's used EO to perform a coup.

>>171017

>What people do not realize is that the names in the annex are only the beginning. Anyone who committed these crimes can have property confiscated. And anyone COMPLICIT.

I think the list of people is something of a red herring. Even if the list weren't there, it would still have exactly the same effect because those people on the list probably fit all the criteria listed in the EO.

>>171047

It is FAR larger than 13 cunts. It is pretty much all corrupt cunts.

Cunts.

>>171050

They go on the books of the US Treasury.

>>171056

Russia has corruption as do most other countries. What this says is the US is gonna nationalize any organization that has any corruption in it.

>>171085

Depends on how far they go. That's what I've been watching for since Dec. 22 when the dark shit kicked off.

>>171102

>This EO gets our stolen tax dollars back.

This really depends on how many assets they can seize in the 90 days of the EO. I'm sure they're after the most egregious ones. But, for example, I don't see a single Microsoft resignation yet. I don't see some of the biggest names being disrupted (like Bill Gates.) Obviously, this includes classified fuckery going on right now (see planefaggotry), but I'm not going to be throwing any parties until I see the extent of the change in power structure.

The corruption is rampant and pervasive. They won't get most of the corrupt, but they don't need to. They only need to destroy the spine of the beast for the effect of the beast to be greatly diminished. I'm sure that's the goal, but I have no idea how far reaching that is.

I have stated for many years that most of the wealth of the world's population is siphoned to the elite and that technology + capitalism will break at some point. This is how it breaks. What it looks like on the other side is impossible to predict at this point.

If you want to get really in the weeds (and here is not the place), there are ways to structure a corruption free system so this kind of thing cannot occur ever again, period. Do some searching for 'sapiocracy' if you're interested.

>>171146

Might be kinda difficult to enforce such a seizure in international court. Just sayin'. You can't just declare that you own the assets of another country.

>>171157

Maybe much moar.

>>171186

>You forgot patents. They are abused to high heaven.

Law in general. But the way they played all of that was through corruption of judges. I'm watching very closely to see if the corruption of judges stops. Once that happens, I suspect the patent law (esp. software patents) will die like they have in the rest of the modern world.

>>171198

I did this in Dec. It is REALLY broad. I see no reason it wouldn't hold up. Also, it is difficult to fight a lawsuit when you don't have the money to do it because your assets have been seized. ;)

>>171215

>far too corrupt

NSA sees all. Let's see how fast DoJ can seize assets. Hopefully, it is FAST.

They sure put up a lot of sealed indictments. I'm crossing my toes that many of those are for judges at all levels.

>>171221

It doesn't have to be their company. If the company participated with them on anything that ends up touching corruption, they're in play.

>>171222

There's undoubtedly a huge staff doing lots of data manipulation to get everything on the books within the 90 day period.

>>171227

Yes. You can kill a company with a relatively small disruption. Then you start a domino effect.

This EO doesn't mean companies won't operate. Instead, they can force resignations, appoint receivers (lawyers who act in place of executives or board members) and act 100% within the law to push their agenda. One of their biggest concerns is to avoid economic and shipping disruptions.

>>171230

Many, many years.

>>171234

Thank you you shark scum of the earth.

>>171239

Not necessarily. They'll avoid disruptions. Bank employees need jobs. Killing a large bank is like setting off a bomb in the economy. They won't do that. But they might force new terms and encourage congress to pass some laws that prevent banks from doing the evil shit they've been doing.

>>171249

The vatican has plenty of wealth. But these guys don't operate that way. They proxy control to control governments so they can play games with whatever amounts they can get governments to print. Nice job if you can get it.

>>171255

Sexual harrassment = cover stories.

>>171269

They'll minimize the exposure of this using the pedo scandals and human trafficking of charities as air cover in the media.

>>171278

I think shadow groups had huge databases based on NSA data and hundreds of analysts working for years to put together this hit list and maintain it until this could be carried out. Scary shit at play.