The attached video is a fairly information-dense interview with Garland. He addresses the claim of improper service, among other things. Sounds like they would have needed the time to fine-tune their plan anyway.

The Georgia case is a lawsuit that has stood up and the judge has already agreed the plaintiffs have shown discrepancies exist in the counts. Here’s the rough outline:

It started when several election workers in Fulton county Georgia noted large batches of mail-in ballots without folds on non-standard paper. They signed affidavits to that effect.
A voter integrity group filed a lawsuit asking to see the ballots, as allowed by the Georgia constitution and law.
After weeks of litigation, the judge ordered the county to release a copy of the low-res scanned images of the ballots to the plaintiffs.
After examining the images the plaintiffs reported to the Judge that the count of ballots did not match the count the county officially reported. There were other anomalies such as obvious duplicates.
The judge then agreed to allow the plaintiffs access to the actual ballots so they could be examined directly and scanned at high resolution, but with the restriction that only county employees could handle the ballots and run them through the scanners. Plaintiffs were also to pay county expenses.  The plaintiffs’ forensic experts, a special master assigned by the judge, and a few other state and county officials would be there to over-see the forensic analysis. The main objective is to determine the source of the discrepancies as well as any other evidence of fraud.

Biden won the state by only 11,779 votes and the number of mail-in ballots for Fulton county alone is around 150,000. The plaintiffs claim a ~21% ballot count discrepancy already exists - easily confirmed or refuted. So significant fraud or (charitably) incompetence almost certainly occurred.