In his conclusion he states that even if he had a million dollars and the FBI to work through the data, it wouldn't matter. The election in those states was such a disaster it would be inconclusive.
Those states must be invalidated completely and no electors can be assigned.
No electors by popular vote. The legislature, ALONE, determines who the electors are. If they want to chicken out and say "No electors" that is their right, but it is retarded to do so.
This is not what I got from his video at all.
In his conclusion he states that even if he had a million dollars and the FBI to work through the data, it wouldn't matter. The election in those states was such a disaster it would be inconclusive.
Those states must be invalidated completely and no electors can be assigned.
No electors by popular vote. The legislature, ALONE, determines who the electors are. If they want to chicken out and say "No electors" that is their right, but it is retarded to do so.
But can't the court invalidate a state if the election was run so poorly that there is no confidence in the vote?
I would think they could. I believe it’s happened before on smaller elections.