And look at the word choice. The headline uses passive construction. Neither it nor the subhead indicate anything untoward about the proposal or who it’s coming from.

The use of the word “unlock” is entirely inappropriate. These are not powers that a president has locked away. These are power a president simply does not have, and for good reason.

These are not “pro-Trump activists,” they are zealous election-deniers.

Arnsdorf doesn’t qualify the claim that “China interfered in the 2020 election” as being false or bizarre or crazy, which it is.

Another key bit of context that’s missing: Any such executive order would inevitably be challenged and likely enjoined by the courts, just like so many other executive orders that were flatly unconstitutional. The Constitution explicitly grants states the power to regulate elections, subject to Congress.

So let me rewrite that for you.

The headline should have been: “Extremists urge Trump to claim election power based on fictitious national emergency.”