And a more specific question is, despite massive evidence, how do you prove it in such a way that either a) courts intervene to take Demented Perv Biteme votes off the board, or b) so that state legislators are convinced enough of fraud that they refused to validate a popular election (a very, very tough climb).
We all KNOW they cheated. But our system is not at all built to contest fraudulent results of elections, especially a presidential election. The Constitutional timetable works against it, plus the notion that judges almost never actually take votes off the board once they are up.
I see the stolen election as just the latest chapter in the now 4 year old coup. The players (Deep State/Courts, Dems, GOP, POTUS, etc.) will act as they have previously and given that it’s hard to see a positive outcome here. We have the truth and that is something the thieving Democrats and their GOP enablers never will. The election may be stolen from POTUS and us but we will not be defeated.
The constitution really demands that all levels of government be bold and excersise their authorities (not just bow to the will of “judges”). Is there an institution left in the country willing to that? If not now, then no.
You have to prove it well enough for the SCOTUS to order the state legislatures to do their jobs. SCOTUS is an appellate court. The state legislatures will most likely only act if they are ordered to do so or if certification is bogged down in the courts and the safe harbor date is approaching, much like 2000. Even then it isn’t certain that they send a slate of Trump electors. Continual shows of support for Trump might motivate them, or absolutely convincing evidence of fraud.
In this election HOWEVER there is a moment in time identifiable when ‘someone’ told the battleground states to stop counting and sen the poll watchers home, then told them to restart the counting without any oversight while truckloads of ballots were delivered to polling stations. That moment when the fraud command went out is a point to which the court can refer in order to disallow ballots thereafter. This election is unlike any other in our History because the fraud was so widespread and massive in count and switching. The courts are in uncharted territory now when litigation starts in earnest. ... And by that time I am confident the DIA will have had enough time to sort out the tech and show the switch fraud and the origins of the fraud incursion into our tabulating systems.
BTW, fraudulent ballots are not votes. But that was a nice try