Rudy's leaking

Sorry, they have videos, pictures, and eye witness testimony on affidavits (which give jail time if you lie on them). So evidence is pouring in.

The problem with conflating affidavits with evidence is you have to assume they people giving them have a certain level of understanding about what they're supposed to be looking for.

The Trump campaign has submitted these in quite a few of the 30+ lawsuits they've now had dismissed, and those cases have presented a clear picture of Trump observers who skipped orientation, provided confused and laughable reports detailing normal election activities as suspicious and complained about things they saw they didn't like that had nothing to do with the process they were observing.

Seriously, after years of this nonsense, how does one remain so naïvely credulous?

So are you saying that poll watchers that were trained before hand had no clue what they were looking for? Please.
Trump has not had 30+ lawsuits dismissed. You are mixing up random republicans with Trump lawyers.

I'm saying that in several states where tranches of these affidavits have been submitted to the court, it's been found that most had skipped the training entirely, didn't understand what they were supposed to be doing, and reported a sundry list of sworn statements including impertinent and nonsensical complaints having nothing to do with the count.

The 30+ are the various lawsuits brought on behalf of the Trump Campaign - the 'random republicans' as you call them are the individual plaintiffs required to satisfy standing in each of the jurisdictions they've filed in.

This is, of course, a completely normal thing as well, and doesn't change the fact that the suits were funded by the campaign and argued by law firms it retained.

In that case you should refer to them as republican or repub lawsuits.
I'll have to see some sources for your other claims.

Why? They wouldn't have been filed without monetary support and legal representation provided by the Trump Campaign.

Nope. They were funded locally. Just like the fraud was probably not funded directly by Biden, but was done locally.

Here's one such case from Michigan which cites the "quality" of their affidavits. From the last page:

"Perhaps if Plaintiffs' election challengers affiants had attended the October 29, 2020 walk-through of the TCF Center ballot counting location, questions and concernes could have been answered in advance of Election Day. Regrettably, they did not and, therefore, Plaintiffs' affiants did not have a full understanding of the TCF absent ballot tabulation process. No formal challenges were filed. However, sinister, fraudulent motives were ascribed ot the process and the City of Detroit. Plaintiffs' interpretation of events is incorrect and not credible."

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/7328416/11-13-20-Costantino-Opinion.pdf

After reading the first few paragraphs, its apparent the judge ruled against the precedent. If it had been delayed, literally nothing bad would have happened since electors don't send in their results for months. This tells me all I need to know. The judge is likely a dem elected by thus same process, or appointed by someone who was.