Read on Twitter
I've been seeing this claim going around QAnon for several days: that an Executive Order signed in 2018 is going to reveal Dominion's role in election interference and collapse the entire Deep State scheme.
I want to drill down on it.
1/
I want to drill down on it.
1/
Let's start by identifying the EO in question.
It's this one.
2/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-imposing-certain-sanctions-event-foreign-interference-united-states-election/
It's this one.
2/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-imposing-certain-sanctions-event-foreign-interference-united-states-election/
The claim here is... unspecific? That's the best way to put it.
Even articles that outline the claim just seem to highlight sentences from the EO and then say "this looks like something might happen."
3/ https://unitynewsnetwork.co.uk/the-dominion-counting-system-the-clinton-foundation-and-the-executive-order/
Even articles that outline the claim just seem to highlight sentences from the EO and then say "this looks like something might happen."
3/ https://unitynewsnetwork.co.uk/the-dominion-counting-system-the-clinton-foundation-and-the-executive-order/
This is the sum total of the "Analysis" section of the article I linked to above. I'm not kidding. This is the whole thing.
4/
4/
The basis of the claim seems to be this:
1. The EO declares a National Emergency to deal with foreign interference in US elections
2. Dominion is based in Canada
3. Dominion "has ties to"
4. ???
5. Trump victory
5/
1. The EO declares a National Emergency to deal with foreign interference in US elections
2. Dominion is based in Canada
3. Dominion "has ties to"
4. ???
5. Trump victory
5/
And the article, as I said, highlights a particular sentence in the EO to suggest something is afoot.
And I suppose in isolation it seems right.
But quoting Section 1(b)(1) by itself doesn't actually tell you much.
6/
And I suppose in isolation it seems right.
But quoting Section 1(b)(1) by itself doesn't actually tell you much.
6/
Without going through the entire 14 sections, I will simply address the strongest form of this claim: that Section 1(b)(i) is relevant.
And it isn't, unless it should be revealed that Dominion is a front for the government of Canada.
Because of Section 1(b) & Section 1(a).
7/
And it isn't, unless it should be revealed that Dominion is a front for the government of Canada.
Because of Section 1(b) & Section 1(a).
7/
If you want to see this claim fall apart, it helps to read backwards.
1(b)(i) is a part of 1(b), which states: within 45 days of receiving the report outlined in Section 1(a) AND WE CAN STOP RIGHT THERE.
Nothing happens without the report from 1(a). So what is that?
8/
1(b)(i) is a part of 1(b), which states: within 45 days of receiving the report outlined in Section 1(a) AND WE CAN STOP RIGHT THERE.
Nothing happens without the report from 1(a). So what is that?
8/
Section 1(a) directs the DNI to conduct an assessment based on information that a foreign government or government operative has interfered with the US election.
They even specifically define what that means in Section 8(f) and 8(g).
9/
They even specifically define what that means in Section 8(f) and 8(g).
9/
And that's it.
As far as I can tell, everything else is just noise.
The fact that Dominion is "based in Canada" is meaningless-- it's not "foreign interference" as defined in this EO unless they are secretly agents of the Canadian government.
10/
As far as I can tell, everything else is just noise.
The fact that Dominion is "based in Canada" is meaningless-- it's not "foreign interference" as defined in this EO unless they are secretly agents of the Canadian government.
10/
There's more if you want to read it: it's actually about imposing financial sanctions. There's no Section 16(a) where people are shipped off to GITMO or elections are overturned.
But the meat of it remains the same, that 1(b)(i) is meaningless without reading 1(a).
11/
But the meat of it remains the same, that 1(b)(i) is meaningless without reading 1(a).
11/
Sorry if this was really dry (as opposed to my usual style, anyway), but rather than crack wise and put in a bunch of GIFs I just wanted to lay this out as plainly as possible.
12/end
12/end
