Here is the point. I can believe personally that something is obvious and proven, but until it goes to court and is proven it is just an opinion.
I have had people shouting down a telephone line we destroyed their PC with our software. They later learnt their hard drive had failed, nothing to do with us, but they were certain and were threatening violence.
It is why until things are stepped through with what the fraud was, how it worked, who did it, what its effect was it is just proposals.
The judiciary are there to interpret law and put it into effect and stay out of politics.
In the UK our primeminister closed parliament, but this was ruled as illegal and null and void.
The ruling was on a point of law.
I can see scotus ruling further investigation is needed, but as no case has gone to trial to test a point of law, how can the supreme court rule on the results of a case that has not even begun. The courts do not invent actions on their own, that is a dictatorship not one run by rules and law passed by the Senate, Congress and the President. The idea that because one does not like an election result, confirmed by the election authorities, can now be disregarded because a group of politicians do not like what has happened has no merit.
If one wants to destroy the role of the courts in a democracy, they take power not given to them to reverse the elected government from office.
I wonder what dream world people have entered. In the whole history of the US nothing like this has ever happened. Causing a revote because the election was compromised has happened. But that only after it was proven to be compromised.
God bless you
