Let's take President Trump completely out of the equation and review the sequence of events. All of the following is completely verifiable:

• On election night, Candidate A is winning handily over Candidate B. Suddenly, multiple states announce they will be effectively pausing their ballot counting, an unprecedented action. Early in the morning after (and at the same time on following mornings), these states produce ballots that radically change the election calculus, putting Candidate B ahead. These ballots are produced even though many of the states in questions were at 80-90% counted on election night.

• Candidate B achieves greater than 90% of the ballots in some locations where this has never happened before.

• Candidate B achieves greater than 90% total voter participation in some locations where this has never happened before. In America - a voluntary vote nation - it is exceedingly hard to achieve 90% voter participation. This figure is closer to a nation with compulsory voting. Checking the past total voter participation figures for the places in quesiton shows a previous high water mark of about 75%, what was considered historic turnout at the time.

• Candidate B achieves the most votes in history, more than even former Candidate C, who was Candidate B's running mate a dozen years ago. Candidate C was immensely popular and yet still did not achieve 90% total voter participation.

• Candidate A wins all major bellwether locations in multiple states (and the bellwether states themselves) yet is overcome by Candidate B's unprecedented voter turnout in a few key locations.

I think, taken together, that all these factors - if they don't convince out of outright fraud - would tend to indicate the results of this election should be very carefully scrutinized. I believe if Candidate A had prevailed by similar means, Candidate B's camp would absolutely want this election reviewed by professionals, and they'd be right in desiring such. It's really not a political question; it's a question of electoral integrity.

So, for all the lurkers who consider the people who post here as crazies, I'd encourage you to think about this from a more intellectually honest perspective. Ensuring that this and all elections are legitimate is the legally and morally right thing to do. It really is just that simple.

Note: I'm not even factoring in reports of poll watchers being disallowed from watching the ballot counting process, the fact that Candidate B's supporters had created a "Transition Integrity Project" months in advance and have open talked about how mail-in ballots would fundamentally change this election, some seriously odd decisions by news networks on election night (calling AZ with 0% reporting while holding FL as long as possible), any of the Benford number analyses, some really very statistically unlikely outcomes involving overwhelming and unprecedented ballots for Candidate B from some locations, etc. All of this is just window dressing.