[Lurking Libertarian]

Patience, grasshopper. Let's say Trump's legal team loses all of its major election fraud cases in the various swing-states. That possibility seems awful. Then say Trump's legal team also loses all of its appeals in those cases. That possibility seems catastrophic. But then Trump appeals it to the SCOTUS. What happens there? Who knows?

The Supreme Court cannot consider new evidence that was not presented to the lower courts.

[MIA_eccl1212]

they can consider and examine and opine on whatever they want to. If there are problems with that they will order that more information be provided...

Of course that means very little because the Supreme Court ordered Pennsylvania to follow a course of action that they prescribed in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania clearly did not do it.

The supreme court does not have an army... all they have is us.

[jersey117]

So now what? There are no other avenues.

[gw-ington]

The Supreme Court cannot consider new evidence that was not presented to the lower courts.

But can modify its argument based on lower-court rulings and gets to argue in front of all nine Justices (assumes no recusals). Republicans have a narrow 5-4 advantage in the SCOTUS. Roberts will vote with the three liberals on the Court to make things fun. And you know all the liberal Justices will march in lock-step unison, so if just one actual conservative on the Court flips, then it's hello Sleepy Joe Basement-Biden for four years ... actually, for only two months, then President Kamala for 15 years and 10 months (assumes elimination of EC, elimination of filibuster, Senate/U.S. population/House/Court-packing, elimination of Presidential two-term limit, Free education/gourmet meals/Teslas/houses for everyone, etc.).