You might want to re-learn how the Supreme Court works. Hint: it doesn't conduct trials and won't be dealing with new evidence not presented in lower court cases. You'd fit right into the Trump legal team.
Your ranting about the media has nothing to do with anything. There have been around 30 trials. There was no evidence of fraud at a single one of them.
Yet ... Trump appointed judges kicked it up to the supreme court rather quickly. This is still where they wanted to go. It is a win for them.
Trump spent $3 million for a vote recount in Wisconsin's largest county to support his baseless claim of ballot fraud but lost by even more than initially thought https://www.businessinsider.com/tru...count-increased-bidens-victory-margin-2020-11
If you google 'President-Elect' it says there are no Constitutional prescriptions, so anyone can define it anyway they want, Nov. 4th, GSA designation, electoral College results or January 20 inauguration. We can define it our way, they can define it theirs, it's just semantics. I called Biden President-Elect as soon a PA filliped on the mail in votes, that was the point it became obvious and unassailable.
"But even if the Supreme Court granted the Trump campaign’s proposed request to reverse the Third Circuit, it would not get much, given the narrow way in which the appeal was structured. Mr. Trump’s lawyers had asked the appeals court only for permission to file a revised version of its original complaint to Judge Brann. If the Supreme Court abided by the strict terms of the appeal, it could do no more than return the case to Judge Brann’s court for further action." https://nyti.ms/3lcfQ8s
