judge can claim that it was not a big enough fraud to change the result
Good thing that isn't how the law works.
The way it really works is, when a candidate is caught committing any sort of widespread, systemic election fraud, they are DISQUALIFIED.
There is no calculation of "how MUCH cheating" they did, or was it ENOUGH to swing the election, and if not, then the act of deliberately cheating was OK.
No. The victory is awarded to the candidate with the most votes who did NOT cheat.
Therefore Donald Trump is the legitimate, actual winner of the 2020 election. No amount of hardcore insistent gaslighting by the media can change that. No matter how many times they say "no evidence exists," it does not diminish by one inch the mountain of evidence that exists.
Good thing that isn't how the law works.
The way it really works is, when a candidate is caught committing any sort of widespread, systemic election fraud, they are DISQUALIFIED.
There is no calculation of "how MUCH cheating" they did, or was it ENOUGH to swing the election, and if not, then the act of deliberately cheating was OK.
No. The victory is awarded to the candidate with the most votes who did NOT cheat.
Therefore Donald Trump is the legitimate, actual winner of the 2020 election. No amount of hardcore insistent gaslighting by the media can change that. No matter how many times they say "no evidence exists," it does not diminish by one inch the mountain of evidence that exists.