Friday, March 30, 2012

Ignorant No More! Due Process and Florida Statutes

Dear nutjobs, “serious reporters,” and average Joes who are ignorant of the law, you might want to brush up on this before sticking your foot firmly in your mouth.  I know this can be a bit difficult to understand for some of you, so here’s the cliffs-notes version, with the full version below, in the hopes that you will be ignorant no more.

The Constitution of the United States, you know it’s that really old document that states the laws upon which all other laws are based, says in both the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments (it’s so important it’s in there twice) that all people have the right to due process.  The fifth amendment also states that no one can be held for a capital crime without being indicted by a grand jury.  Due process protects the rights of all people, even if he’s a 'nut-hoe ass cracka.'  This includes presumptive innocent, or as you may know it, innocent until proven guilty.  The law applies the same to everyone. 
 
The Constitution is the national law that applies to the whole country. State statutes are laws that apply to only that state.  Statutes can vary from state to state but they cannot go against what is in the Constitution.

Here are some important things to know about Florida statutes in regards to the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman case.

If a person feels they are threatened with bodily harm or death, they can use deadly force. The agency (police) may not (that means they can’t) unless there is probable cause that the force was unlawful.  This would be the case if a person claims self-defense and there is evidence that backs up this claim.  Once there is corroborating evidence for self-defense, the police cannot arrest.  The case is then sent to the State Attorney’s office for further investigation.  This is done because if the police arrest someone without sufficient cause it could violation of the state statute.  To all of you calling for an arrest of Zimmerman now, take special note of this.  You all watch TV, you should know, if proper procedures aren’t followed, evidence gets deemed inadmissible and the case gets thrown out.  Since the statute says ‘may not arrest’ it is better to not arrest than have evidence, or the case thrown out later.  The police must follow the law.

I’ve also included the definitions of murder, 1st and 2nd degrees as well as manslaughter, because I have seen way too many people confused about this.  Should this go to court, it is unlikely the prosecution would try him for first degree murder because it would be impossible to prove premeditation under the law.  Second degree murder or manslaughter, if the case even goes to trial, would be more likely, with manslaughter the probable.

The most important thing to remember is that it takes time for the process to work.  This is not TV where cases are tied up neatly with a bow at the end of an hour.  This is real life and works on real life time, not the fantasy timetable of television.  The state attorney’s office and the DOJ are investigating.  The supreme court of Seminole County, Florida is going to hear the case starting on April 10, 2012 to see if there is enough evidence to indict.  Due process is the only, legal, path to take.

 The Constitution of the United States
Bill of Rights
Amendment V
 
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

 Amendment XIV
  Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
   

Florida Statutes:

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

 (1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

 (2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).

 7.2 MURDER—FIRST DEGREE and SECOND DEGREE

782.04  Murder.--  (1)(a)  The unlawful killing of a human being:  1.  When perpetrated from a premeditated design to effect the death of the person killed or any human being;

7.2 MURDER—FIRST DEGREE
§ 782.04(1)(a), Fla. Stat.

            When there will be instructions on both premeditated and felony murder, the following explanatory paragraph should be read to the jury.
            There are two ways in which a person may be convicted of first degree murder.  One is known as premeditated murder and the other is known as felony murder.
            To prove the crime of First Degree Premeditated Murder, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt
1.             (Victim) is dead.
2.            The death was caused by the criminal act of (defendant).
3.            There was a premeditated killing of (victim).

            Definitions.
            An “act” includes a series of related actions arising from and performed pursuant to a single design or purpose.
            “Killing with premeditation” is killing after consciously deciding to do so.  The decision must be present in the mind at the time of the killing.  The law does not fix the exact period of time that must pass between the formation of the premeditated intent to kill and the killing.  The period of time must be long enough to allow reflection by the defendant.  The premeditated intent to kill must be formed before the killing.
            The question of premeditation is a question of fact to be determined by you from the evidence.  It will be sufficient proof of premeditation if the circumstances of the killing and the conduct of the accused convince you beyond a reasonable doubt of the existence of premeditation at the time of the killing.
            Transferred intent. Give if applicable.
            If a person has a premeditated design to kill one person and in attempting to kill that person actually kills another person, the killing is premeditated.
   
7.4 MURDER—SECOND DEGREE
§ 782.04(2), Fla.Stat.

            To prove the crime of Second Degree Murder, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1.             (Victim) is dead.
2.            The death was caused by the criminal act of (defendant).
3.            There was an unlawful killing of (victim) by an act imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind without regard for human life.

            Definitions.
            An “act” includes a series of related actions arising from and performed pursuant to a single design or purpose.
            An act is “imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind” if it is an act or series of acts that:
1.            a person of ordinary judgment would know is reasonably certain to kill or do serious bodily injury to another, and
2.            is done from ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent, and
3.            is of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life.
            In order to convict of Second Degree Murder, it is not necessary for the State to prove the defendant had an intent to cause death.
 
7.7 MANSLAUGHTER
§ 782.07, Fla. Stat.
782.07 Manslaughter;  (1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
 
To prove the crime of Manslaughter, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt:           
1.         (Victim) is dead.
            Give 2a, 2b, or 2c depending upon allegations and proof.
2.          a.         (Defendant) intentionally committed an act or acts that
                        caused the death of (victim).
                        b.         (Defendant) intentionally procured an act that caused
                                    the death of (victim).
  c.         The death of (victim) was caused by the culpable negligence of (defendant).

The defendant cannot be guilty of manslaughter by committing a merely negligent act or if the killing was either justifiable or excusable homicide:

Negligence:
Each of us has a duty to act reasonably toward others.  If there is a violation of that duty, without any conscious intention to harm, that violation is negligence.

Justifiable Homicide:
The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if necessarily done while resisting an attempt to murder or commit a felony upon the defendant, or to commit a felony in any dwelling house in which the defendant was at the time of the killing. 
   
§ 782.02, Fla. Stat.
Excusable Homicide:
          The killing of a human being is excusable, and therefore lawful, under any one of the following three circumstances:
1.            When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent, or
2.            When the killing occurs by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or
3.            When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune resulting from a sudden combat, if a dangerous weapon is not used and the killing is not done in a cruel or unusual manner.
 
§ 782.03, Fla. Stat.
Give only if 2a alleged and proved.
In order to convict of manslaughter by act, it is not necessary for the State to prove that the defendant had an intent to cause death, only an intent to commit an act that was not merely negligent, justified, or excusable and which caused death.  

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Exploiting Death to Recruit Members, RevCom Comes to Town

Standing out from amidst a sea of hand held posters was a large green fluorescent banner that read: 17 Afghani people, Trayvon Martin murdered, The system of Capitalism-Imperialism set these crimes in motion.





The Revolutionary Communist Party was present at the March 26, 2012 rally for Trayvon Martin.  They were there to promote their idea that the death of Trayvon is as their website states, part of “an endless chain of such acts that are perpetrated, condoned and covered up by the powers-that-be.”
I spoke with RevCom Member Joey Johnson who parroted the RevCom statement and also said that it is the system and Capitalism is responsible for Trayvon’s death.  “Murdered The system of Capitalism Imperialism set these crimes in motion.” Johnson states that it is the system of capitalism imperialism “that thrives on and depends on things like white supremacy, a pecking order, keeping black people super oppressed and unleashing people like George Zimmerman.”
Johnson says that both those parties (Republicans and Democrats) upholders are and enforcers of the system. That “they all use code words. Traditional values of America, reasserting men dominating over women, reasserting white people dominating over people of colors” Stand your ground is code words for “letting loose more of this vigilante violence.” He calls republicans fascists, democrats are afraid of republicans they are all fascists and that this country is founded on slavery. An underlying system. A modern day version of the haves and the have nots.

* Note: my memory was full and cut Johnson off.  Fortunately Matthew Boyle, from the Daily caller picked up the tail end of the Johnson discussion, watch it here (along with his remarks). Communists, occupiers infiltrate Sanford Trayvon rally

Like the black leaders who looked to take advantage of Trayvon’s death to promote their race war, the Revolutionary Communist Party is there to promote their social war.  They are exploiting the deaths of Trayvon, the Afghanis and even Emmett Till for their own, nefarious ends.  They travelled all across the country with their shiny banner to take advantage of the media hoopla and the large congregation of upset and vulnerable people in order to try and sway these people to their cause. It’s scapegoatism.  They have made the country the scapegoat for Trayvon’s murder.  Capitalism is to blame for Trayvon’s death and it must be stopped.  They call for revolution to make a complete overhaul of the system to one of communism.  As their website states, the want a revolution to “immediately establish a new power.” It calls to strip “strip the capitalist-imperialist class of its property and power.” What that means is they want to take everything from everyone and redistribute it so that everyone is equal.  That means that what you work for isn’t yours, it belongs to everyone.  You can’t spend the money you earn; it all goes in to a pot. In essence, what's yours isn't yours, it's everyone's.
So how is this recruitment going for them?  Evidently not too well.  Their “constitution” which calls for the “immediate” establishment of this new power is from 2008, nothing too immediate about it. I guess it's not too frequently that an event such as this comes along that they can piggyback on.  They say death sells, and Revcom is certainly attempting to sell their wares and using every horrific, widely known, death they can think of to sell it.  It's their marketing strategy, exploit death to recruit members.  Shameful.

They wish to destroy our republic, our country which was founded on liberty and freedom. A country which is the envy of the world because it is the most prosperous and successful countries in the world.  The wish to tear it down and destroy it and they are standing on the backs of those, like Trayvon Martin, to do it.  Silly marchers calling for George Zimmerman to be arrested, don’t you know, it was capitalism that killed Trayvon.

The Death of a Boy Makes Opportunistic Vultures Drool

The case of Trayvon Martin, a black boy, has made the opportunistic vultures drool. These are the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton who never miss an opportunity to take advantage of any situation that may advance their racist cause.  To them everything is about race even when it's not.  As soon as they heard about the case of a black boy being killed by a white man (he's not, he's Hispanic, but let's ignore that fact), they descended like vultures. 

The family of Trayvon Martin, with Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton moved the location of their news conference from the church in Sanford, FL to a church in Eatonville, FL.  All previous meetings and conferences were held at the Allen Chapel AME Church in Sanford or in locations nearby.  Why, all of a sudden when Jesse Jackson comes to town does everything move to the Macedonia Missionary Baptist Church in Eatonville?  They moved it because location is important.  Moving the location of the press conferences from racially diverse Sanford, to majority black Eatonville, one of the first all-black towns to be formed after the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, allows them to join together in solidarity as black people.  To present a united front as black people and in essence make this about race which was more difficult to do in more diverse Sanford.  The plan is simple, rile up the locals, go to Eatonville, get the support of the black community locally and nationally and then bring the race hate back to Sanford. It makes it so much easier to play the race card with the support of the black community.There is no better place to garner support of the black community that than in mostly black Eatonville.

They descended upon the family and dragged them in to the race baiting and into their devious politics because the face of a little black boy is great publicity.  Look at how they've used it to get the community and the country caught up in their whirlwind.  There was not all this rallying and hoopla before Al Sharpton got here.  There were no national news outlets, with their big shiny trucks blocking the roads before the vultures came to town. 

Hundreds of people lined up in Sanford outside the civic center in the hopes of going inside to speak their minds to the council.  There have been other council meetings held prior to the vultures, why now do hundreds wait in line?  While hundreds waited in line for the council meeting, hundreds more took to the streets of Sanford with their signs and chants of “No Justice, No Peace” and “We want justice, we want it now” marching in a parade to the rallying point in Ft. Mellon park. Most of the marchers were calling for the arrest of George Zimmerman, with some even calling for his death or injury.  Many supported the theory that it was a race related murder.  Something must be compelling them to do this.




 Of course, the media was there to nibble up every bit of the brouhaha.  What makes better news than the martyrdom of a boy?  Outside in Ft. Mellon Park, the people gathered and the news crews national, local and independent were mulling around interviewing people.  Cameras were everywhere.  Many of the national news organizations such as CNN and MSNBC were broadcasting, not from amidst the people, but from a sectioned off area set up just for them.  Some of them were even barricaded off from everyone else.  They’ve seen it before, send the photographers and videographers in to get some shots and sound bites, but not need to go out and actually talk to people, they already know the story they will present. The only news people out and about among the crowd were local and independent news and citizen journalists.  This is why I generally recommend getting your news from local news, they tend to be less agenda oriented. 

In racially diverse Sanford, the crowd was primarily black.  Though I never felt uncomfortable, I was well aware that I was a small white woman in a big black sea.  There were other white people there.  Many of the journalists were white, and some of those rallying were white, but the crowd was mostly black.  The black community was rallying.  Busloads of people from other black communities showed up.


The New Black Panthers were in Sanford, they were cordial and respectful when I spoke with them.  When I said, it’s hot out there today, their leader said, “Issues are hot, police and government are not doing their jobs.”  They weren’t nasty or threatening, they did not say anything about “lynching” George Zimmerman. I though it odd the way the members stood around the leader as if to put their bodies between themselves and anyone who may harm him and also the posting of one person to stand guard at the window, I just assumed this was because there’s been a lot of negative talk about them and they wished no harm to their leader.   I was shocked later on to see a flier put out by them calling for the capture, dead or alive of George Zimmerman for the murder-execution of Trayvon Martin, it was chilling.  I had never seen such a thing.  In this country where we have laws, due process and presumed innocence. It's disheartening.
Here's the New Black Panther leader I met being interviewed by CNNs Anderson Cooper:
"Bounty Put on Trayvon Martin Shooter"


The rally took on a strange, almost a carnival/party atmosphere. Many of people held colorful signs with pictures and sayings, each one trying to be more creative than the rest.  There were skittles galore.   There were even a few people in costume.    There were large screens which showed the council meeting and later provided everyone a view of the speakers. 
I ran in to this gentleman, dressed as a jester, who did not agree with the Black Panther reward.  He felt that George Zimmerman should be arrested and go to trial.



It seems a bit odd that the one person who seemed to have a somewhat level head about the whole thing is the one wearing the jester’s hat. 
Most of the people were buying in to what Jackson and Sharpton were selling.  As good little followers should, they were appalled that the police would report information that would make Trayvon look bad, even if it’s true.  Jackson and Sharpton worked feverishly to denounce the reports.  It is not helpful to their cause for the information that was reported in the Orlando Sentinel which the police released, that says witness statements say that George Zimmerman was heading back to his SUV and that Trayvon attacked him from behind, punching him in the face and breaking his nose, he continued beating on George Zimmerman and had him pinned to the ground.  Sharpton, Jackson and the family are upset that reports are coming out that show Trayvon in a negative light. Yet, for days, they complained that the police had no proof that George Zimmerman had acted in self-defense.  When the police then reveal the information that they had, Zimmerman’s statement backed up by statements from eye-witnesses, they complain because this information can squash their case.  They lose ground in the race baiting they are doing.  They don’t even acknowledge that Zimmerman is Hispanic.  He is a “white-Hispanic,” whatever that is. 

I don’t know if any of the information coming out is true or not.  I was not there.  This is why there needs to be a thorough investigation and, if warranted, a trial.  Then if found guilty, punishment.  You can't just skip to punishment.  This is what the 5th Amendment is all about, presumed innocence and due process, gathering the facts before passing judgment.  Yet there are those who have already, such as the New Black Panthers, found George Zimmerman guilty of murder without an investigation and without a trial. 

No one disagrees that it is very sad that a teenage boy is dead.  What is terribly tragic is that there are those who are exploiting Trayvon’s death for their own selfish purposes.  In doing so, they tend to do and to report only that which is useful to further their cause. It's a shame that a boy's death has become a travesty, to exploit his death to promote a racist platform.

We can’t allow opportunists like Sharpton and Jackson to use the death of this boy for their racist agenda.  It has to be about finding out the truth.  We can’t ignore our laws because it doesn’t fit in with the promotion of a racist agenda.  We must stand true to the Fifth Amendment, to support due process and presumed innocence.  If we stray from our laws as put forth by the framers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, if we ignore State and local statutes, our country will be lost.  We can’t allow that to happen.   God Bless America!

Sunday, March 18, 2012

A Question About Obama's Executive Order, It's Not the Question You Think.

Yesterday President Barack Obama signed the National Defense Resources Preparedness executive order.
Before becoming alarmed, it is important to remember that past Presidents have signed similar executive orders.  Obama’s version is not that different.  While everyone is aghast and focusing on what is in the order, in my research I have uncovered something that raises an important question.
Before I get to that, here's the previous versions for comparison:
 
President Ronald Reagan signed executive order 12656 -- Assignment of Emergency Preparedness Responsibilities of November 18, 1988

President Bill Clinton’s executive order 12919 National Defense Industrial Resources Preparedness of June 3, 1994
President George W. Bush did not sign a national defense resources preparedness executive order because he signed the executive order creating the Department of Homeland Security which includes national defense resources preparedness and much more.  This is important to note and is what raised some flags to me as to Obama's intention behind the signing of his executive order.
At first glance, Obama's signing of this order does not seem to be anything other than an attempt to update a previous version of an executive order. 
However, here's the question I raise: Why update the National Defense Resources Preparedness order and not the Homeland Security order which includes National Defense Resources Preparedness?
It seems as though Obama is taking a step backward and is ignoring or attempting to circumvent the Homeland Security order.  What does this mean for Homeland Security and the safety of our Country?
It is an important question that needs to be raised.

Update: 3/20/12
Since I have seen a lot of concern over the sections about loans in the executive order, here is a side-by-side comparison of 3 of them.  Bush's Homeland Security order didn't include loans. 
Here is a side by side comarison of the Obama, Clinton and Reagan orders:

There really is no reason to be alarmed by the loan section.

President Barack Obama’s National Defense Resources Preparedness executive order.
President Bill Clinton’s executive order 12919 National Defense Industrial Resources Preparedness of June 3, 1994
President Ronald Reagan signed executive order 12656 -- Assignment of Emergency Preparedness Responsibilities of November 18, 1988
Sec. 301. Loan Guarantees. (a) To reduce current or projected shortfalls of resources, critical technology items, or materials essential for the national defense, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense, as defined in section 801(h) of this order, is authorized pursuant to section 301 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2091, to guarantee loans by private institutions.

801 (h) "Head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense" means the heads of the Departments of State, Justice, the Interior, and Homeland Security, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the General Services Administration, and all other agencies with authority delegated under section 201 of this order.

(b) Direct Loan Guarantees. To expedite or expand production and deliveries
or services under government contracts for the procurement of industrial
resources or critical technology items essential to the national defense, each
agency head is authorized to make direct loan guarantees from funds appropriated
to their agency for Title III.
Sec. 205. Federal Benefit, Insurance, and Loan Programs. The head of each Federal department and agency that administers a loan, insurance, or benefit program that relies upon the Federal Government payment system shall coordinate with the Secretary of the Treasury in developing plans for the continuation or restoration, to the extent feasible, of such programs in national security emergencies.
Sec. 302. Loans. To reduce current or projected shortfalls of resources, critical technology items, or materials essential for the national defense, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 302 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2092, to make loans thereunder. Terms and conditions of loans under this authority shall be determined in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of OMB.

Sec. 302. Loans. (a) To expedite production and deliveries or services to
aid in carrying out government contracts for the procurement of industrial
resources or a critical technology item for the national defense, an agency
head is authorized, subject to the provisions of section 302 of the Act,
to submit to the Secretary of the Treasury or the President and Chairman
of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (in cases involving capacity
expansion, technological development, or production in foreign countries)
applications for loans.
(b) To expedite or expand production and deliveries or services under
government contracts for the procurement of industrial resources or critical
technology items essential to the national defense, each agency head may
make direct loans from funds appropriated to their agency for Title III.
(c) After receiving a loan application and determining that financial assistance
is not otherwise available on reasonable terms, the Secretary of the
Treasury or the President and Chairman of the Export-Import Bank of the
United States (in cases involving capacity expansion, technological development,
or production in foreign countries) may make loans, subject to provisions
of section 302 of the Act.
(5) In cooperation with the Secretary of the Treasury, develop plans for providing emergency assistance to the private sector through direct or participation loans for the financing of production facilities and equipment;
Sec. 305. Determinations and Findings. (a) Pursuant to budget authority provided by an appropriations act in advance for credit assistance under section 301 or 302 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2091, 2092, and consistent with the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, as amended (FCRA), 2 U.S.C. 661 et seq., the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority to make the determinations set forth in sections 301(a)(2) and 302(b)(2) of the Act, in consultation with the Secretary making the required determination under section 202 of this order; provided, that such determinations shall be made after due consideration of the provisions of OMB Circular A 129 and the credit subsidy score for the relevant loan or loan guarantee as approved by OMB pursuant to FCRA.

(c) After receiving a loan application and determining that financial assistance
is not otherwise available on reasonable terms, the Secretary of the
Treasury or the President and Chairman of the Export-Import Bank of the
United States (in cases involving capacity expansion, technological development,
or production in foreign countries) may make loans, subject to provisions
of section 302 of the Act.

(d) Developing, in consultation with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and in cooperation with the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, the National Credit Union Administration Board, the Farm Credit Administration Board and other financial institutions, plans for the continued or resumed operation and liquidity of banks, savings and loans, credit unions, and farm credit institutions, measures for the reestablishment of evidence of assets or liabilities, and provisions for currency withdrawals and deposit insurance;



(8) Develop plans for initiating tax changes, waiving regulations, and, in conjunction with the Secretary of Commerce or other guaranteeing agency, granting or guaranteeing loans for the expansion of industrial capacity, the development of technological processes, or the production or acquisition of essential materials;


Additional links:
Executive Order 11858--Foreign investment in the United States
Executive Order 12457 President's Commission on Industrial Competitiveness