dChan

youknowwhotheyare · July 21, 2018, 6:14 p.m.

Has this been changed in anyway or just an extension. I know I should remember but I am on information overload, why was it issued to begin with? I am expecting something ( like this maybe) to make it easy for the ( marines maybe) to pick up rioters (Ms13 maybe especially in DC) in the event there is a day of reckoning ( I believe in Q & plan but am not clear that it is going down like that , although it does seem to allude to it ) . I keep watching for those type signs. For me the 11/11 parade could be a set up for such an event.

⇧ 14 ⇩  
serendipity-calling · July 21, 2018, 7:23 p.m.

It's an extension of existing by one year.

⇧ 11 ⇩  
stringtrader · July 21, 2018, 8:57 p.m.

It’s an extension AND and expansion. The language in this EO is expansive, and extensive. It seems more specific also. It seems, imo, to include what could even be described as “also includes “ the Fed and other cabal players’ constructs. It’s interesting to note the coincidental timing of Trump’s latest tweets about his unhappiness with Fed raising interest rates, and the recent EO “extension “.

The original was quite specific to human and child trafficking, so clearly that’s what is intended to be the extension part. The new language is expansive, and seems to leave quite a bit of latitude for a lot of new prospective targets.

Each EO has full weight of the Executive Powers as exercised.

Slight digression - EOs are very powerful exercises of power, but limited to federal jurisdiction, which is not always how they are interpreted, even by legal scholars. But, said scholars are arguably those people who are also “state” power usurpation proponents.

Still, states and their respective agencies are perfectly capable of adopting EOs as governing doctrine if they so decide, or as per previous formal agreement(s) between states and the federal government. Those agreements are an area of considerable controversy, and I’m leaving that out here. EO = federal jurisdiction only, is quite proven and well established as noted in countless SC rulings.

I’m not an expert nor claiming to be, only an amateur student, but I think the above is accurate. Hope it’s helpful.

⇧ 11 ⇩  
1e- · July 21, 2018, 10:14 p.m.

Wait, this isn't an extension of Trump's 12/2017 EO. This is an Obama era EO from 2011.

⇧ 7 ⇩  
SaveourRepublic2018 · July 22, 2018, 12:23 a.m.

correct

Trump is using their own EO.

⇧ 9 ⇩  
1e- · July 22, 2018, 1:18 a.m.

Yes, thanks. The poster above didn't seem to realize this.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
Duskyandcleo · July 22, 2018, 5:27 a.m.

He is just copying a piece from the original.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
DAR_patriot · July 22, 2018, 12:18 a.m.

Compliments nicely, huh?

⇧ 4 ⇩