It is possible to have contradictory machine audits to show that the machines are legitimate. It is also possible to have contradicting studies invoking Benford's law, showing that the election was legitimate across the entirety of the election. It is possible to show that there are statistical elements in your favor. Yet you have presented none of that.
You are lying. As you would say, scroll up.
You have been shown details of machine audits.
You have been shown details of signature audits.
You have been shown results of hand recounts which affirmed the initial results.
You have been shown videos of judges dismissing the “evidence” as unreliable.
You have been shown a video explaining why Benford’s law isn’t the smoking gun you think it is.
You have been shown a video explaining why the “statistical anomalies” are bogus (TL;DR, they’re based on false assumptions, if you start that way you will draw a false conclusion).
Your entire response has been to desperately shout that everyone who has disagreeable evidence with you is wrong or lying. That is a pretty pathetic position to be in, fyi.
There has been plenty of evidence regarding fraud presented, and based on this evidence judges have agreed with fraud claims and have granted machine audits which have turned up further evidence against you. Yet you have presented nothing to counter it.
Bill Barr disagrees with you.
So does the head of cyber security.
So do a lot of Republican senators and election officials.
So does Donald Trump actually - he called it “the most secure election in US history”.
And despite all this “evidence” all 50 States have certified their election results, the Electoral College has voted and in a few weeks Biden is going to be inaugurated.
Why did the Democrats steal the Presidential Election and not the Senate one on the same ballots? The fact you have no answer to this shows the embarrassing weakness of your position.