It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Exexcutive Order 13959 takes effect at 09:30am EST on Jan 11, 2021

page: 2
31
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

It's being rolled out in stages. I think divestment isn't required until the end of the year.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 06:22 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa


Elaine Chao's company is Foremost Shipping....based out of China.

Didn't know her daddy gave the couple "wedding gift" of between 5-25 million

edit on 10-1-2021 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 06:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: smurfy
a reply to: RickinVa

It looks like the Chinese are buying American stuff with their own finances....
they have been doing that for yonks, it's known as trade, permitted use of American intellectual property, and probably copying as well...sounds about right for God knows how many countries.


It isn't "permitted use of intellectual property" if they steal it.

But of course you knew that...

How is your 5G install going over there?




5G has largely been a project of a consortium of European and Asian companies, since 2008.

The USA only joined in after AT&T bought into 5G in December 2019. If anything, the USA has 'aquired' 5G technology very late in the piece after other countries did all the development work.

While the initial release of 5G by 'Three UK' in Ireland was delayed (due to a dearth of consumer devices and a temporary GCSB block on the technology) the uptake and coverage have been faster than the 4G rollout was. Currently, 5G is offered by British Telecom Mobile, EE, O2, Vodafone UK, Three UK, Tesco and Sky Mobile, and covers most of the UK and Northern Ireland.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 07:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: smurfy
a reply to: RickinVa

It looks like the Chinese are buying American stuff with their own finances....
they have been doing that for yonks, it's known as trade, permitted use of American intellectual property, and probably copying as well...sounds about right for God knows how many countries.


It isn't "permitted use of intellectual property" if they steal it.

But of course you knew that...

How is your 5G install going over there?



Can't you read? I gave three categories, the Chinese use all of them, they ain't the only ones...America was/is no exception.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 07:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: RickinVa

Although this EO goes to great lengths to redefine all Chinese business and anyone who does business with these Chinese companies, as supportive of the Chinese military, I can't really see what prosecutions, limitations, or restrictions will be applied.

It seems like the point of this EO isn't to 'do' anything, but is to create an identifiable 'group' to vilify people in regard to business investment and association with Chinese nationals.

If the EO had some defined action, I feel sure that the Trump organization and Donald Trump himself might be included due to any business investments in Chinese companies or in China.

I expect that this will likely be part of escalating pieces of legislation as this EO seems incomplete.

I would expect that this might be challenged on constitutional grounds if it actually went somewhere.


Exactly, it means nothing from my perspective of manufactured goods, of which much of are made of many parts, and many of them are sourced all over the world, not just German, not just British, not just American.

Rolls Royce have parts made in Thailand...so do Renault, and God knows how many others, it would be stupid to think any country is not using the same system of trade these days in manufacture.
edit on 10-1-2021 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 08:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
that sticks out like a sore thumb:

"and engaging in other acts to ensure access to United States capital."



Hmmmmm I wonder what "other acts" may be. First thing that pops in my head is bribery of government officials.


Capital and Capitol are two very different words. Trumpy-bear means money, not the building, or his spell-checker is wonky.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 08:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: RickinVa

Although this EO goes to great lengths to redefine all Chinese business and anyone who does business with these Chinese companies, as supportive of the Chinese military, I can't really see what prosecutions, limitations, or restrictions will be applied.

It seems like the point of this EO isn't to 'do' anything, but is to create an identifiable 'group' to vilify people in regard to business investment and association with Chinese nationals.

If the EO had some defined action, I feel sure that the Trump organization and Donald Trump himself might be included due to any business investments in Chinese companies or in China.


Typical, spun to vilify Trump.

The EO is about securities. SEC has loooong been under pressure to crack down on Chinese security offerings. They don't follow the same rules and oversight as other publicly traded funds and American investors are NOT protected from companies that are practically insolvent. China is more than happy to provide the secrecy for these companies to continue scamming investors. Back in 2017 these companies were given three years to comply with auditing requirements.

There are a number of companies that provide direct exposure to military contractors or providers in China. Nobody thinks that US citizens should be benefiting from Chinese military spending (except people like Uncle Joe, he believes politicians should be). It's common sense.

This EO doesn't stop all dealings or business with China. It stops the trade of securities. It makes no sense to allow shady Chinese companies profiting on the CCP machine to remain on US exchanges. It's a money sink for ill-informed investors and a purse for grifters cashing in on IPOs.

As for constitutional challenge, no. There is no constitutional grounds for listing a foreign security on public exchanges, certainly no constitutional basis for waiving SEC rules for them.
edit on 1/10/21 by Ksihkehe because: Typo

edit on 1/10/21 by Ksihkehe because: Typo



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 09:10 PM
link   
There is another recent EO, from the 5th Jan 2021.

Addressing the Threat Posed by Applications and Other Software Developed or Controlled by Chinese Companies

In it the the following services have 45 days to cease trading: Alipay, CamScanner, QQ Wallet, SHAREit, Tencent QQ, VMate, WeChat Pay, and WPS Office.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 09:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: kwakakev
There is another recent EO, from the 5th Jan 2021.

Addressing the Threat Posed by Applications and Other Software Developed or Controlled by Chinese Companies

In it the the following services have 45 days to cease trading: Alipay, CamScanner, QQ Wallet, SHAREit, Tencent QQ, VMate, WeChat Pay, and WPS Office.



Between the two EO's.....that's a hard line on several fronts towards China....and long overdue IMO. Be a shame to see them go tits up on Jan 20th.

Anyone with more than 2 brain cells should logically deduce that China was strongly opposed to Trump's re-election. The question is....exactly how far did they go to ensure Trump would not be elected?
edit on 10-1-2021 by RickinVa because: spelling



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa



exactly how far did they go to ensure Trump would not be elected?


Dominion got $400 Million from China in the weeks before the election. With how the CCP undertakes its foreign affairs, corruption works for them as Hunter's laptop has shown. The Belts and Road initiative is a massive spending spree of global communist takeover.

As for how far they are willing to go, some talk of China sending in 1/4 million troops under the UN flag to help with any civil unrest. I don't know what kind of logistics are available to do that. Taiwan looks to be in a tough spot these days.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

Perhaps they were against his re-election so he can refocus back to paying off the Chinese factories that are making his products, paying back the 10s of million in loans that he owes to the bank of China, or back to his plan to open 20-30 Trump hotels in different cities in China. Super weird that y'all consistently run right on past Trumps China dealings.



posted on Jan, 13 2021 @ 03:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: choomsuba
I’m hearing from various sources and operatives that Trump invoked the Insurrection act.


If he had, wouldn't it be widespread knowledge? I don't think it's something which could be kept quiet, even in this day and age.



posted on Jan, 13 2021 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: dogstar23

I am not so sure he needs to. If you look at the EO that was signed in 2018 regarding election interference it puts us in a state of emergency now. It also talks about no notice needs to be given due to how money transfers occur and can be done so quickly so any notice would render it ineffective and seizure of assets couldn’t take place. If we are in a state of emergency how does that affect the insurrection powers? Does it need to be declared to make arrests?



posted on Jan, 13 2021 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Identified

So The U.S Government gets to decide what companies are "Communist Chinese Military Companies"?


talk about authoritarian power...



posted on Jan, 13 2021 @ 08:15 PM
link   
A new statement from the Whitehouse has come out.

Text of a Letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate


Today, I signed an Executive Order amending Executive Order 13959. The amendments prohibit certain sales as well as purchases of publicly traded securities, or any securities that are derivative of, or are designed to provide investment exposure to such securities, of any Communist Chinese military company. They also prohibit possession of such securities by United States persons 1 year after a company is determined to be a Communist Chinese military company. And, finally, they allow the Secretary of Defense publicly to list whether a company is a Communist Chinese military company



posted on Jan, 13 2021 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Darth_Prime



So The U.S Government gets to decide what companies are "Communist Chinese Military Companies"? talk about authoritarian power...


The CCP do set the standard of authoritarian power. If they want to try a covert take over America through fraud, blackmail and corruption what is America suppose to do?



posted on Jan, 13 2021 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Darth_Prime
What do you want? That is one of the federal governments only true jobs: keep us safe from other nations.

If China is using a company to gain tech that helps build up Chinese Military then the US shouldn't be putting money into it or allowing them to buy it.



posted on Jan, 14 2021 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: ToddB

originally posted by: RickinVa
that sticks out like a sore thumb:

"and engaging in other acts to ensure access to United States capital."



Hmmmmm I wonder what "other acts" may be. First thing that pops in my head is bribery of government officials.


Capital and Capitol are two very different words. Trumpy-bear means money, not the building, or his spell-checker is wonky.


Not sure what the heck you are talking about...

The EO states: and engaging in other acts to ensure access to United States capital.

Capital: "wealth in the form of money or other assets owned by a person or organization or available or contributed for a particular purpose such as starting a company or investing"

Looks like the term capital is correct.
edit on 14-1-2021 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
31
<< 1   >>

log in

join