That article is bizarre. Written on Oct. 16th, the author somehow predicted that the election result would be contested in the way it has been. Take this part for example:
Hi @Joe,
I read your post today and this twitter thread yesterday. It just clicked that the bolded parts I've quoted from the twitter thread, pasted below, might be why an article was written about what you quoted and seen as a possible outcome. Looks like Trump was taking about it in late Sept.
-Currently, Republicans have a state delegation majority with 26 (likely 30 in the new Congress) out of 50. Ergo, Trump wins.
-Prez Trump has clearly discussed and been briefed on a strategy to contest the election via Constitutional means, first through the courts and then...
...through House, saying at a Sept. 26 rally in—where else—Pennsylvania: “And I don’t want to end up in the Supreme Court and I don’t want to go back to Congress either, even though we have an advantage if we go back to Congress — does everyone understand that? I think it’s....
...26 to 22 or something because it’s counted one vote per state, so we actually have an advantage. Oh, they’re going to be thrilled to hear that.” NO clearer indication exists that this was his plan all along.
-Moreover, Politico reports, “In private, Trump has discussed the possibility of the presidential race being thrown into the House as well, raising the issue with GOP lawmakers, according to Republican sources" such as McConnell, Graham, McCarthy, etc.
-This would explain Sen. McConnell’s resolute backing of President Trump. It is clear, McConnell, who is shrewd and believes in raw power, knows POTUS is on solid Constitutional ground. With our help, he will hold the GOP Caucus in line.