WND:
There have been many allegations, along with sworn statements from credible witnesses, about fraud during the 2020 presidential election, although whether the sum total of any misbehavior would have changed the results remains a question.
The facts are that Joe Biden was declared the victor by only a few tens of thousands of votes across multiple states in an election where some 155 million or 160 million people voted.
Further, there is no dispute that leftists like Mark Zuckerberg tried to influence the election with his $350 million that he handed out to mostly leftist election officials to “run” their offices.
And there’s no question that some state and local officials simply changed or ignored state laws regarding the ballots even though the Constitution allows only state lawmakers to make those changes.
Those arguments will continue long past the next election, likely. But the evidence that an election outcome can be changed by fraud has been pointed out now by commentator Hans von Spakovsky, who wrote about a California fight at the Daily Signal.
The senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, former Federal Election Commission member and former assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice pointed out the case is charged with allegations at this point, still, because it still has to come to court for a resolution.
He noted the Supreme Court had observed in 2008 that the risk of voter fraud was “real” and that it actually “could affect the outcome.” more here
If there were only 155 million or 160 million people that voted why are there 185 million total votes?
It was a stolen election.
Nice that the SCOTUS thought the risk of election fraud was “real” in 2008, and in 2020 they said “no standing” to everything. Which is it, SCOTUS?