This is something I think about all the time. There are three executive orders that Trump signed which have to do with confiscating assets or other property as penalties for certain types of serious crimes. These executive orders are:

The executive orders you mentioned, signed by President Trump, address the confiscation of assets or property as penalties for specific types of serious crimes. These orders are part of a legal framework aimed at combatting issues such as human rights abuses, corruption, and foreign interference in U.S. elections.

• Executive Order 13818, issued on December 20, 2017, focuses on blocking the property of individuals or entities involved in serious human rights abuses or corruption. It authorizes the confiscation of assets within U.S. jurisdiction to deter and punish such activities.

• Executive Order 13848, dated September 12, 2018, primarily imposes sanctions in response to foreign interference in U.S. elections. While it mainly addresses sanctions, it also provides authority for blocking property and assets of foreign individuals, entities, or governments involved in these activities.

• Executive Order 13928, issued on June 11, 2020, pertains to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and allows for blocking property and assets of individuals associated with the ICC in the context of potential investigations or prosecutions against U.S. personnel and allies.

Us Q researchers have also receive significant hints and other guidance from our top researchers re: how these EO's would be executed within the bounds of the Department of Defense's Law of War manual. But we're not all West Point lawyers, so, all we have are barely educated guesses.

The EO's are merely the legal justification for doing this. The redistribution of vast wealth on such a scale would require careful planning, legal justification, and societal consensus. As you can see in our sidebar:

"Those who cannot understand that we cannot simply start arresting w/o first: ensuring the safety & well-being of the population shifting the narrative removing those in DC through resignation to ensure success defeating ISIS/MS13 to prevent fail-safes freezing assets to remove network-to-network abilities kill off COC to prevent top-down comms/org, etc. etc. should not be participating in discussions." Q

This means that the plan must not just successfully attack the enemy, but plan for every societal contingency to keep our civilization together. This means planning for how people perceive the world afterwards, after the arrests. We used to think that the arrests would be the end. No, that's the beginning. We need not just the legal justification, but societal consensus. The redistribution of vast wealth on such a scale would have significant implications for the economy, international relations, and individual rights, and the necessity of this redistribution must be obvious to everyone involved.

It is essential to respect due process, property rights, and the rule of law, even during times of emergency, hence, where Q has said that, essentially, "it must carry weight, it must be legal, by the book."