I'm not going to argue with you as you seem to have a completely fixed viewpoint, which I am assume no amount of evidence will shake. You can do the research yo

I'm not going to argue with you as you seem to have a completely fixed viewpoint, which I am assume no amount of evidence will shake. You can do the research yourself if you are so inclined. You reference the dismissed court cases, as if courts solely prove or disprove the validity of information--regardless, I'll leave you with this: "Republicans argue that since their observers couldn’t watch the vote count, they can’t provide that evidence and have asked for discovery. Still, while the courts have agreed that irregularities have occurred, they weren’t willing to grant discovery unless Republicans first present enough evidence of fraud to overturn the election. Republicans thus faced a kind of Catch 22." Source: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3756988 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3756988