Every State claims their election process is free and fair. The legislatures of each State pass laws that govern how their election process works and they require Poll workers to follow the rules. The time to challenge the process is prior to the election, not afterwards. After an election, the only recourse is through the courts and the only people who have standing to bring suits are the voters who were actually damaged by their votes either not being counted or their vote diluted by illegal votes. The vast majority of the suits are brought by people who do not have standing, because they can't prove they were damaged. Moreover, the courts are always going to side with the voter. A voter who believes and does vote legally within the laws of the State at the time their vote was cast has every right to expect that their vote should and would count. The courts are not going to disenfranchise voters based upon the incompetence of State workers or State politicians. True, errors must be corrected, but a voter should not be punished when he or she cast a legal vote at the time it was cast. The court is not going to toss out massive numbers of legal votes because of a small number of irregularities. Not sure what 20,000 falsified votes you are talking about, you need to provide a link.

@TyKC Bull
Crap!
A crime is a crime and simply changing the rules doesn’t invalidate a legitimate concern. The law my friend is not cast in stone, judges are appointed to correct these issues, however when the judges are corrupt leftists it needs more forceful intervention.

@Rick-A It's true a crime is a crime and therein lies the problem. The people who certify the election results are like bankers. You might think that someone has robbed a bank. You call the police. The first thing the police do is ask the banker if he's been robbed. When the banker says no, there is no crime. So, what are the police supposed to do? It's hard to go into court and say there has been a crime when the people who the crime was supposedly committed against say there was no crime. Not much the courts can do.

@TyKC Essentially then The USA is fucked. Royally!

@Rick-A Not altogether. First, a banker can't say he hasn't been robbed when he has. Covering up a crime is a crime. So what has to be done is to show that the certifiers of the election are covering up massive fraud. But then that's a crime and the perpetrators must be brought to justice. So, someone has to charge the certifiers with a coverup. That's a big lift. The Trump Campaign can scream "fraud" in the the Press and on TV, but alleging it in court is a different story. Lawyers who allege that a crime has been committed without evidence can be sanctioned by the court. That's why Trump legal team withdrew and had to be replaced with Rudy G. They didn't want to risk being sanctioned.