[DannyTN]

Fraud is hard to prove. Especially if the people in charge are running the fraud. And controls are ignored. Ignoring controls is not proof of fraud.

There were a lot of shenanigan's in the 2020 election. But that's not proof of fraud. it is proof of poorly run elections, poorly enforced controls, and non-existent controls, and a lack of legal penalties.

They should go through:

• the Navarro election fraud report.
• The Giuliani affidavits,
• the findings from the Arizona audits, and other audits,
• and other reports of fraud or misbehavior.

They should then

• have some professional audit firms design controls to prevent this.
• They should include as much transparency as possible without sacrificing individual voter privacy.
• And some legal teams to draw up legislation to enforce and provide penalties for misbehavior.
• Then they should pass legislation at the federal level to cover all Federal elections.
• And get it passed at state levels as much as possible.

[TexasGator]

“They should go through:”

Who are “They”?

Trump?

Election is next year ...

[thegagline]

Fraud is hard to prove.

The standard of proving fraud is clear and convincing evidence which is less rigorous (difficult) than “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

[nicollo]

The Giuliani affidavits alone are devastating — and irrefutable, aka, “affidavits.” That’s called “evidence.”

The Courts deliberately avoided considering them precisely for it.