What could they do about it? Courts and governors made the decision.
Pass a law rescinding it or argue through the courts system that the legislature's actions violate the state constitution or the federal constitution.
A law which is alleged to violate the constitution is grounds to give you standing legally. This is not the line that the big brains used: they instead argued that the change in voting habits "could maybe potentially cause us fraud in the next election," which is why they wouldn't have standing - suspicion of future potential fraud isn't really clear damages.
If they had argued right out the door that what the states had done contradicted various articles of law, by contrast, they might have gotten somewhere.
As-is, it looks abundantly clear like they made no motions in this regard until it became clear both that they had lost, and that by discarding those mail-in ballots, they could cheat out a win by disenfranchising a method that overwhelmingly favored their opposition - and would offer that opposition no chance to instead re-vote in person.
if there are audit you can post them.
lol at using the disputed certifications as proof. circular reasonin.
no one has to prove shit to me because there is no evidence for them to show me.
Nigger I fucking did. You can use that search function up at the top of the page to look through my posts in here and search your name. I gave you link after link after link and what'd you fucking do? You did fucking nothing because your dumb ass knew you got called out and you didn't actually do any fucking legwork. The certifications are not disputed - no one fucking cares what a retard like you thinks, or else they -would- be disputed.
I have the state certifications. I have the audits. I have the recounts. I have the people pouring over those "poll irregularity" numbers and figuring out that you retards kept comparing apples and oranges. I have people looking over the alleged "improper" voters and finding that most of them, indeed, are enfranchised. I have the supreme court 9-0 throwing out a laughably desperate attempt to call the PA SC's action unconstitutional. I have the supreme court throwing out 7-2 the pathetic clown car of a texas lawsuit, and those 2 explicitly stated they believed they had to hear the case but that it was meritless and they'd have issued no stay as a result.
I have all of this to say that the election was secure.
To say it was insecure, you have a repeating list of lawsuits that either got laughed out or went nowhere. You have litanies of "testimony" that never was submitted to a court and which failed to convince any election-related committees to change their certification - in even just a single state. You have some video clips without access to the full video. You have some youtube people. You have some numbers you copy-paste without taking five fucking seconds to check what they are or where they're drawn from.
That's what you have to say the election was insecure.
Nothing will ever convince you, and you reject all evidence. You, and anyone that operates like you, is a dumb retard that no state needs to be concerned with trying to please. Because until orange man is on the throne, you'll claim it was stolen, rigged, unfair, etc and "just show me this one more thing, that time I'll believe you" daisy-chained. Seek comfort among people on your TOWERING INTELLECTUAL LEVEL, because everyone else is going to have a laugh.
