[adorno]

The burden of proof is on those who claim that the election was fraudulent/stolen/dishonest/whatever

The burden of proof is with the party making the allegations or accusations. Thus, democrats who would put Trump or Juliani on the defendant's chair, would have to prove that the election was not stolen. Plus, there were many irregularities before and after the votes were tallied. It would be up to the accusers to prove that those irregularities were not a problem at all.

Proving a negative is difficult, but, the negatives exist on both sides.

[NorthMountain]

would have to prove that the election was not stolen.

That, as I said, is a logical impossibility.

However ... since when is saying "The election was stolen" a crime? WTF? What statute does that violate, and if there is one how is that statute not a direct violation of the First Amendment?

This situation is ridiculous.