You are too funny. If there is no evidence offered, no evidence is examined. Mere assertions are not evidence.
If there is no standing for the hearing, there is no evidence examined.
That covers all but one legal challenge, which will not ove rturn the election.
Of the dozens of litigations (53?) only one has not been dismissed or held to be moot. Trump's litigation plan is to wear down, delay opposition.
Trump's purpose in all this has been openly stated: elections will not put him in power. Even the 2016 election lacked the popular mandate, he's not going to be able to work that again.
Instead, he is attacking the process itself as rigged- more people voted against him than for him, wao he lost the election.If he can reduce the numbers who vote against his interests, then the minority that does support him is 'elected'. Thta's what Republicans mean by 'securing the ballot'- eliminate the franchise and ballots of as much of the demographic that would otherwise tend to vote against them. Urban populations that don't have drivers licenses because they don't need to drive, for instance, may not have the ID that Reoublican legislators require ro vote....
In briefest words- Democrats want everybody with the franchise to vote; Republicns want to limit the franchise.
|
