Well, according to a federal judge appointed by President Trump:

> Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.

And according to Giuliani, Trump's own attorney, in the actual court filings:

> the Campaign “doesn’t plead fraud. . . . [T]his is not a fraud case.” Mot. to Dismiss Hr’g Tr. 118:19–20, 137:18

When your own attorney says "this is not a fraud case", do you think maybe there was no fraud?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/read-the-third-circui...

The election is over. Right wing media is claiming that it's not. That's a lie. End of story.

I'd like to point out that parent ketzo's comment - which describes reality - has been downvoted enough that it appears light grey.

This means that there are enough voting members on HN motivated enough to downvote a comment describing reality - and an insufficient number of voting members motivated enough to upvote it - that a comment describing reality is downvoted.

That's... highly disappointing.

To elaborate: right wingers claim massive fraud, they claim to have evidence, but the cases they've taken to court have been flimisier than fifth grader writing assignments and have mostly been thrown out.

To grandparent commenter: at a certain point you have to use a bit of your intelligence and see for yourself whether a claim is full of shit or has merit. Unfortunately this might be an example of Dunning-Kruger in action...

From my understanding, most of the cases that have been thrown out were due to lack of standing not evidentiary merit.

... and a wide variety of Trump appointees in the judiciary.