> "SEC filings: The parent company of Dominion Voting Systems received $400 million from an Investment Bank in Switzerland that is 75% owned by the Chinese government. UBS Securities is a Swiss investment bank which owns 24.99% of UBS Securities Co LTD, a Chinese Investment Bank. The remaining 75% of UBS Securities CO LTD is owned by the Chinese government,” states the report."
Er, among other errors, that has ownership backwards.
UBS Securities, the Swiss bank, and the entity named on the State Street Capital Form D, is not owned by the Chinese government at all. It owns 24.99% of UBS Securities, a chinese investment bank, and the other owners of that Chinese investment bank are reportedly government and government-connected "private" firms in China. So, even if the "received $400 million from" was correct (and that is also a misreading of the Form D[0]), the entity that they dealt with is a Swiss bank that owns ~25% of a Chinese bank of which the remaining 75% is arguably controlled by the Chinese government, but the Chinese bank, whoever controls it, isn't involved in the transaction at all.
[0] UBS Securities was the "Sales Compensation Recipient" on the Form D, which means that they receieved some money (commissions, finders fees, etc., as I understand) connected with the sale of thesecurities whose offer was identified on the Form D, but it doesn't mean that the $400 million identified as the amount offered came from (or even through) them, though it does mean they had some role in facilitating at least some of the sales.