I don't know about the date correspondence. The photo was posted May 10 (you say, I believe it, didn't check for myself), and if the photo is some kind of presidential order (not necessarily titled "Executive Order") then it existed on 5/10. Are you saying it was post-dated when the photo was taken? Or the photo is of a draft, for show? Or the photo is an undated order, date to be added later?
My simple point was that if one has two papers with different engraved letterhead, one knows they are not the same letter without seeing more. The anons got focused on the body/text and overlooked the engraved letterhead.
And a Wednesday 5/16 Q drop suggests the declassification order couldn't be promulgated until after declassification was demanded by others. Not said in the Q-drop, just my remark, the order of events is for optics, not required as a matter of law. If the photo on 5/10 is some sort of "precursor memo," we just take Q's word for its contents. In other words, the 5/10 photo doesn't prove Q authenticity, it is just a prop to gin up discussion about getting declassification on the material Nunes is seeking.
This thought is duplicated in Q1386 (see post 961) says “EO unreleased. Today was the precursor. It must be requested 'officially' first, correct?” “Unreleased “ means it’s ready to go. But the President cannot just release certain information. It must be “requested” first. Now that “precursor” has happened, the already prepared EO will soon be released.
Someone needs to match upcoming EOs with the letters revealed.
As you pointed out, this thought is duplicated in Q1386 (see post 961) “EO unreleased. Today was the precursor. It must be requested 'officially' first, correct?” “Unreleased “ means it’s ready to go. But the President cannot just release certain information. It must be “requested” first. Now that “precursor” has happened, the already prepared EO will soon be released.
Someone needs to match upcoming EOs with the letters revealed.