Jim Halpert Explains

Nope, if you do that people will love him. You gotta cut his quotes up and find something that sounds racist and only show that part

Want to count only the legal votes, just once?

Proof?

"No proof to the contrary." --- There is, you just ignored all of the presentation of the proof.

"No proof to the contrary." --- The the contrary, there's no proof that Biden won with the most legal votes. There is, however proof of voting fraud that has already been presented.

Tell that to the courts.

Still waiting on you to prove that Biden won the most votes

Still waiting for your reply to come see me since you claim on my fascist name address city state

Sorry, from your previous comment, it seemed that you were under the impression that only legal votes were counted, that's why I asked what I did.

When can I see this proof that only legal votes were counted?

"and since the burden of proof is on the accuser, all vote counts were good. Any further questions, refer to the court rulings. There are 60 of them." -- What you did is deflected away from my question to you. I didn't make any accusations, I'm asking that only the legal votes to be counted. So when can I see this proof that only legal votes were counted?

Alright, let's break this down slowly:

Courts ruled that nobody's proven they weren't legal. OK, do you understand that bit? Oh, no, hold it, I'm aware you're in denial about that fact - you've made that very clear. I'm asking if you just understand what that means.

And since the burden of proof is on the accuser - so, that means, in American jurisprudence,
we go by whether you can prove that a vote was illegal. Nobody has to prove that votes were legal; someone tries to prove that a vote was illegal and then the other side has to prove that there's a problem with their proof. Same reason cops can't bust into your home demanding you prove that you didn't kill Jimmy Hoffa; they have to prove that you did first.

All vote counts were good. Pretty much, the absence of proof of a crime is taken as proof of an absence of crime. You didn't prove illegality, therefore they were legal.

Any further questions, refer to the court rulings. There are 60 of them. OK, so that means, basically, read what the judges wrote. They write very clearly and very directly about what they were thinking when they threw these cases out - exactly because they know they'll be scrutinized as to whether they were following the law as opposed to following a political desire. If you read them, any further questions you might have will be answered in those documents.

"I've already answered you on this. Read it again." --- You didn't prove that Biden won with the most legal votes though. Still waiting.

"All vote counts were good." -- Prove it. Prove that Biden won with the most legal votes.

Prove that Biden won with the most legal votes. I'll wait.

"Courts ruled that nobody's proven they weren't legal" --- Where? I haven't seen that ruling. Where have courts said that only legal votes were counted?

You haven't? Where you been? This thing's been litigated very publicly like 60 times. Read the rulings.

If the media didn’t misrepresent him so much, the vote count would be vastly different.

Yup, that and if the Democrats didn't commit voter/election fraud, the counts would be vastly different.