>>1912571 (pb)
I strongly suspect George Soros has off-shore tax accounts somewhere, and realistically we'd need the accounts of those leaked publicly to comb through and clamp down on.
A more legal aspect is Trump could strangle out off-shore tax havens (prohibit financial trade with them). But Delaware is a CIA shell company shithole where I suspect even more slush fund accounts and on-shore tax havens are located. Most of the 9/11 planes trace their history through Delaware's lack of financial accounting.
If he doesn't have off-shore tax accounts, then he's definitely receiving finances from somewhere. The bastard just declared war on my formerly favourite browser, so I've now got a personal stake in this fight.
There's a number of approaches to knocking George Soros' exploits out of the park:
1) He actively approaches organisations that do activities he approves of to finance them. It might be worth setting up a few shell organisations across the board that use deep cover pretending to do such activities, then solicit those donations, and then funnel said donations right back into opposing him (or simply wasting the funds).
2) He's unable to fight on multiple fronts, and he tries to compensate for this by financing what he thinks are citizen grassroot movements, which means if you start opening up as many fronts as possible, he'll end up overspending himself and throwing money at all angles, including to non-threats.
3) It might be worth 'overlooking' any siphoning of funds or fraud within the organisations he does support because that means his finances ultimately gets wasted. His issue is he's a one trick pony: he can only throw money at everything. Drain the finances, he loses that power.
4) He can't seemingly directly influence the organisations, or at least not in an appropriate real-time situation, which means individual organisations are prone to making decisions to engage targets that aren't profitable or waste a lot of resources.
5) He's largely reliant on stock investments to make returns, which means any hits to the stock market or particular stocks in turn hurts his finances.
6) The people he finances are classically inexperienced, prone to impulse, poor decision making, kneejerk reactions and essentially follow a liberal handbook play-by-play. I've heard reports of leadership training and group training sessions, but their inexperiences often re-exert themselves and they're often at the dictate of costly legal eagles to assist.
7) I suspect his assets are spread globally, including non-liquid assets. Draining the liquid assets, seizing them or blocking them is key. The non-liquid assets generate the liquid assets, but he has a lot of liquid capital.
8) He's an old man, he's not really technology savvy, and the userbase he recruits are millennial-minded (out of touch with reality, other people's feelings or expectations). If it isn't shaped into something like a social media campaign, a petition or a boycott, they tend to flop (legal matters tend to get drawn out and fail regularly).
9) There's a reason why he operates from America and not Hungry. Work out why and you'll know his key weakness.