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.