The question called for a detailed answer, so I'll show an explicit calculation, using the Schrödinger equation, in a toy model that exhibits stimulated emission. Most of the effort goes into constructing the model and explaining what the various pieces mean. Once this is done, the calculation itself is relatively quick and easy, and the interpretation of the result is straightforward.
The model
A simple type of laser works by putting the molecules of the lasing material into a relatively long-lived excited state, one that would eventually decay on its own (releasing a photon) even if it were not "stimulated." If it does decay on its own, the emitted photon is in a superposition of different momenta, with no preference for momenta parallel to the long axis of the laser. The model will illustrate what happens when other photons, emitted by other previously-excited molecules, are already present. The model includes:
a single two-level molecule;
two different photon modes, representing two different momenta with the same magnitude and different (say, orthogonal) directions.
The model involves two parameters:
a real parameter $\lambda$ that determines the strength of the interaction between the molecule and the photons;
a real parameter $\omega$ representing the energy of the molecule's excited state (relative to the ground state). The same parameter $\omega$ also represents the energy of a single photon (either mode).
Units with $\hbar=1$ are being used here. Altogether, the Hamiltonian is
$$
H =
\omega\, a^\dagger a +
\omega\, b^\dagger b +
\omega\, c^\dagger c +
\lambda \big(c^\dagger (a+b) +
(a+b)^\dagger c\big),
\tag{1}
$$
where $a,b,c$ are operators having the following significance:
$a^\dagger$ and $a$ are the creation and annihilation operators, respectively, for photons with one momentum;
$b^\dagger$ and $b$ are the creation and annihilation operators, respectively, for photons with the other momentum;
the operator $c^\dagger$ promotes the molecule from its ground state to the excited state, and the operator $c$ moves it from the excited state back to the ground state.
To ensure that the model involves only two energy levels for the molecule, the operators $c,c^\dagger$ are taken to satisfy the anticommutation relations
$$
cc = 0
\hskip2cm
c^\dagger c^\dagger = 0
\hskip2cm
cc^\dagger+c^\dagger c = 1.
\tag{2}
$$
In contrast, the photon operators $a,b$ satisfy the usual boson commutation relations
$$
aa^\dagger-a^\dagger a=1
\hskip2cm
bb^\dagger-b^\dagger b=1
\tag{3}
$$
and:
$a$ and $a^\dagger$ commute with $b$ and $b^\dagger$
$a$ and $a^\dagger$ commute with $c$ and $c^\dagger$
$b$ and $b^\dagger$ commute with $c$ and $c^\dagger$
The interaction terms in the Hamiltonian, the terms multiplied by $\lambda$, are
$$
c^\dagger (a+b)
\hskip1cm
\text{and}
\hskip1cm
(a+b)^\dagger c.
$$
The first one describes the absorption of an $a$-photon or $b$-photon by the molecule, and the second one describes emission. Both terms must be present because the Hamiltonian must be self-adjoint. To complete the definition of the model, let $|0\rangle$ denote the state with no photons and in which the molecule is in its ground state, so
$$
a|0\rangle=0
\hskip2cm
b|0\rangle=0
\hskip2cm
c|0\rangle=0.
\tag{4}
$$
Now, suppose that the molecule has been prepared in its excited state and that $N$ photons are already present in mode $a$, so the initial state of the system is
$$
|\psi(0)\rangle = \big(a^\dagger\big)^N c^\dagger|0\rangle.
\tag{5}
$$
Working in the Schrödinger picture, the state evolves in time according to
$$
i\frac{\partial}{\partial t}|\psi(t)\rangle
= H|\psi(t)\rangle
$$
with $H$ given by (1).
The calculation
At the initial time $t=0$, the right-hand side can be evaluated explicitly:
\begin{align*}
\left.i\frac{\partial}{\partial t}|\psi(t)\rangle\,\right|_{t=0}
&= (N+1)\omega\,|\psi(0)\rangle
+ \lambda \big(a^\dagger\big)^N (a^\dagger+b^\dagger)|0\rangle \\
&= (N+1)\omega\,|\psi(0)\rangle
+ |A\rangle+|B\rangle
\tag{6}
\end{align*}
with
$$
|A\rangle
\equiv
\lambda \big(a^\dagger\big)^{N+1}|0\rangle
\hskip2cm
|B\rangle
\equiv
\lambda \big(a^\dagger\big)^{N}b^\dagger |0\rangle.
\tag{7}
$$
The interaction term involving $c^\dagger$ does not contribute to (6), because $(c^\dagger)^2=0$. The commutation relations for the photon operators imply
$$
\frac{\langle A|A\rangle}{\langle B|B\rangle}
=\frac{(N+1)!}{N!} = N+1.
\tag{8}
$$
To derive (8) quickly, notice that equation (3) says that $a$ acts formally like the "derivative" with respect to $a^\dagger$, so
$$
a\big(a^\dagger\big)^n|0\rangle=n\big(a^\dagger\big)^{n-1}|0\rangle.
$$
Interpretation
Now consider the significance of the result (6)-(8). The right-hand side of (6) is a quantum superposition of three terms:
a term proportional to $|\psi(0)\rangle$ in which the molecule has not yet decayed,
a term $|A\rangle$ in which the molecule has decayed by emitting an $a$-photon,
a term $|B\rangle$ in which the molecule has decayed by emitting a $b$-photon.
Of course, this represents only the initial trend, because equation (6) is evaluated at $t=0$. But for the purpose of building intuition with relatively little calculation, this is sufficient.
First consider the case $N=0$, representing the situation with no photons present in the initial state, so the molecule decays on its own, without stimulation. In this case, equation (8) says that the $|A\rangle$ and $|B\rangle$ terms have the same magnitude, so equation (6) says that the photon is emitted in an equal superposition of both momenta, with no preference for either one. This is spontaneous emission.
Now consider the case $N\geq 1$, representing the situation with one or more $a$-photons present in the initial state. In this case, equation (8) says that the squared-magnitude of the $|A\rangle$ term is greater than the squared-magnitude of the $|B\rangle$ term by a factor of $N+1\geq 2$. Therefore, although the photon is still emitted in a superposition of both momenta because both terms are present in equation (6), it is now emitted preferentially with the $a$-momentum because the $A$ term in equation (6) has a larger magnitude than the $B$ term. The ratio $N+1$ says that the more $a$-photons are present in the initial state, the stronger this preference is. This is stimulated emission.
This simple model did not account for the walls that contain the lasing material, but we can suppose that the walls are designed (using mirrors, etc) so that photons in mode $a$ (say, with momentum parallel to the long axis of the laser) remain in the lasing cavity longer than photons in mode $b$. This introduces a slight tendency to have more $a$-photons than $b$-photons after the initially-excited molecules begin to decay, and then the stimulated-emission effect amplifies this tendency more and more strongly as the number of $a$-photons increases. Eventually, the number of $a$-photons being emitted (stimulated or otherwise) balances the number of $a$-photons being absorbed (the Hamiltonian (1) includes both terms), and the process plateaus.
Edit: These clarifications were posted as comments, but the trail of comments was becoming long, so I moved the clarifications into this appendix.
As a comment pointed out, this simple model is oversimplified in several respects. In particular, it includes only two photon momenta. A more realistic model should include many photon momenta, and a proof that lasing actually occurs would need to show that the effect of stimulation in a small fraction of those modes is sufficient. However, the purpose of the simple model presented here is not to try to prove that lasing occurs; the purpose is to illustrate the phenomenon of stimulated emission in a simple way.
Another concern was raised about treating the norm-squared of a term on the right-hand side of (6) as a transtition probability. That was not the intent. Equation (8) is only meant to say that in equation (6), the contribution of the $A$ term is (initially) growing faster than that of the $B$ term. With a single photon as the stimulator, the emission for that one mode will be enhanced relative to other modes; but emission in the other modes still occurs. Before we interrupt things with a measurement, all of these things are occurring continuously together as part of the quantum superposition according to the Schrödinger equation, but some contributions are growing faster than others, which will affect the distribtion of outcomes when a measurement finally does occur.
A comment by Steven Sagona mentioned that true single-photon sources are difficult to prepare. A more realistic source might prepare a state like
$$
|0\rangle
+\alpha a^\dagger|0\rangle
+\frac{1}{2}(\alpha a^\dagger)^2|0\rangle
+\cdots
$$
with a relatively small magnitude of the coefficient $|\alpha|$, so that higher-order terms are negligible. To analyze stimulated emission when the simulating photon(s) come from such a source, we can simply replace equation (5) with a superposition involving different values of $N$ (such as $N=0$, $1$, and $2$). Since the Schrödinger equation is linear, this has the effect of replacing equations (7) with the corresponding superpositions. By comparing the norm of each term having a $b$-photon with the associated term that has an extra $a$-photon instead, we again conclude that the latter term is growing faster (at least initially) than the former in terms where at least one $a$-photon was present initially. The overall effect is weaker because the dominant term (the one with no photons present initially) does not include any stimulation, but the stimulated emission effect still occurs in the other terms (the ones that do have photons present initially).
That comment raises an interesting point. Even in this single-molecule model, and even with a true single-photon stimulus so that there is no entanglement in the initial state, the output light still comes out entangled with the molecule. This trend is already evident in equation (6), whose right-hand side is a superposition of two terms:
The entanglement is even more pronounced in a model with lots of molecules, because the final state is a superposition of many different numbers of molecules having emitted their photons. Since it's entangled, exactly what pure state (if any) best represents the output light (e.g., a coherent state) can be a tricky question, one whose answer probably requires careful consideration of "decoherence".
The original question was:
How can "giving" energy (in the form of photons) to electrons stimulate them to come to a lower energy state?
The key message of this answer is that stimulated emission is not about giving energy to the molecule. Energy must be given to the molecule in order to put it into the excited state in the first place; but the phenomenon of stimulated emission occurs because photons are bosons, as expressed by equation (3). This is what leads to the factor $N+1$ in equation (8).