Claims of fraud don’t add up

I have a few questions about President Donald Trump and the Republican Party’s unending lawsuits over the election results:

1. If Trump lost only due to fraud, how does he explain that this fraud extended only to the votes for president? The Republican Party did well in down-ballot races. So all these other Republicans won either without or in spite of fraud?

2. Trump has brought suit after suit in several states claiming massive fraud, with lawyers claiming they had absolute proof — yet case after case has been thrown out for lack of evidence. If their evidence is so clear and convincing, why has it been deemed insufficient to stand up in court?

3. The courts to which these dozens of cases have been brought have been presided over by judges appointed by both Democrats and Republicans, yet not one has seen the evidence presented as sufficient to proceed. Are the Republicans suggesting some kind of conspiracy among these judges that crosses party lines and extends to states as far apart as Michigan and Georgia?

4. How is it that fraud occurred only in states that Trump lost? Does anyone believe if he had won the states where he is suing by an equally narrow margin, he would be concerned with fraud?

So Trump goes on screaming like a toddler, and millions of his followers believe him. And letters like this fall on deaf ears, because fanatics have never been convinced of anything by mere logic. Diane Rhodes,