Jester Naybor (@JesterNaybor)

A reminder of the real issue here, that is getting lost in the focus on “proving fraud”. The compromises in the election processes - junk-mail voting, hasty changes in election rules, and irregular activity in counting the votes; perpetrated by judges, governors and other unauthorized parties in haste in a crisis-not-to-waste - tainted the election as much as bad police procedure taints courtroom evidence that leads to its exclusion ... and the government, as opposed to its individual operatives, does not qualify for the presumption of innocence. The burden of proof is not on challengers to produce examples of fraud; it is on election officials to assure that no fraud – detected or undetected – has significantly impacted the results. This is where process matters. Adherence to logically-conceived processes that assure that: Only votes from eligible voters One vote each. Personally cast by each voter. are accepted and accurately tabulated, meets that burden of proof. Deviations from those processes render meeting that burden of proof impossible in a system where the secret ballot (rightly) does not include identifying information once cast. Without meeting that burden of proof, how can courts declare (among other things) that there was not enough fraud to affect the results? > The compromises are all the evidence that is needed, that this election can't be trusted and should have been sent to the House per the Constitution to vote in a President, not merely certify a compromised election. Of course, that would have led to Trump winning a second term, and they couldn't validate 75 million deplorable people like that. And it is reinforced by the courts ducking their duty to adjudicate the process on technicalities ... including dismissing lawsuits against the compromised states, by other states, on "lack of standing" regarding an election where the results of the compromised elections are imposed on all 50 states. > It is the job of government to prove that this election was on the up-and-up. And "because we say so" is not sufficient. This is why a cloud will always hang over this election.