Biden already won. The election has been over for days. Trump has no plausible path to victory. An agency in Trump's own administration published a statement today saying this was the most secure election in American history.
https://apnews.com/article/election...ns-elections-66f9361084ccbc461e3bbf42861057a5
Trump was not investigated based off of speculation. He told Lester Holt in a public TV interview that Russia was on his mind when he fired the Director of the FBI. He later went on to obstruct justice multiple times trying to block the FBI's counter-intelligence investigation into the activities of several former members of his campaign and whether or not they coordinated with Russia as part of Russia's attempts to influence the 2016 election.
More specifically, Trump told the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, just a day after he fired the Director of the FBI, that:
"I just fired the head of the FBI. He was crazy, a real nut job." "I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off." He later told Lavrov "I'm not under investigation." demonstrating that part of his rationale for firing Comey was because he refused to publicly announce that Trump wasn't under investigation.
I know I've asked this before, but have you read the entire Mueller report? I have. Several times. There was ample evidence in the report that Trump almost assuredly committed numerous federal crimes in his first couple of years in office.
I've also previously asked that you please list any specific examples you have that you believe are indicative of election fraud. You've listed two specific examples at various times in this thread, and I believe that I provided a strong rebuttal as to why neither of those two examples are credible, convincing, or truthful. Vague claims of fraud and casting aspersions on the integrity of the election are easy to do.
I mean, I could easily claim that Senate candidates receiving less votes than Biden in multiple states is evidence that Mitch McConnell and his allies tampered with ballots. But, I wouldn't do that because there's a reasonable explanation for why under-votes and split-ticket voting occur in every single Presidential election.
If I wanted, I could allege that Trump's appointee at the USPS deliberately made changes to the USPS' ability to process large amounts of mail, right in time for the peak mail flow of absentee and vote-by-mail ballots, correct? Isn't it VERY possible those changes led to a sizeable number of ballots being potentially being delayed past the cutoff mark in several key swing states? But, is that proof? An allegation is merely that. Hard evidence is required for an allegation to be substantiated. Nonetheless, there's no hard evidence that DeJoy's foolish meddling at the USPS actually delayed an electorally signicant number of ballots. But, what could be said about the potential that votes were suppressed due to months of evidence that the USPS was delivering mail with delays ranging anywhere from 3-4 days past normal to WEEKS past the normal delivery time?
Again, it's easy to claim there's been foul play. But, the actual burden is that someone has to provide hard evidence of fraud or suppression, and do so in a way that specifically quantifies the number of votes impacted and explain the who, what, when, how, and why of how said votes were impacted. Merely saying it's possible something impacted some votes somewhere is neither adequate nor convincing.