Yep, remembering wrong. Georgia was targeted because of a narrow race which made it a crucial battleground state. Why is that relevant? Well, it would not make sense to dispute the outcome in a state where it would not benefit. Qui bono. Who benefits? In this case, targeting Georgia would benefit Trump by being a bigger beneficial result, with the least amount of effort (easier to hide); because the vote count would be much closer. The legal question here is how did he try to win the benefit of victory in Georgia, after the election was over? Ex post facto means after the fact. Is there evidence that this effort was done in an illegal manner?