The premise “enough fraud to change the results” is itself “fraudulent”. ANY widespread fraud should be sufficient to re-do any election, “sufficient to change results” or not.
Warthog wrote:
“The premise “enough fraud to change the results” is itself “fraudulent”. ANY widespread fraud should be sufficient to re-do any election, “sufficient to change results” or not.”
Exactly; the USSC said in one of their previous decisions (before this election, but dealing with a different issue), that “fraud vitiates everything”.
This is legalese for “a rotten apple spoils the whole barrel”.