This is fantastic work, but even with how clearly they violated election laws in PA, I don't see how a judge signs off on invalidating 900k votes. Not saying they can't do so legally, just that no judge will have the balls to do it. SCOTUS took a ton of heat for a long time just for getting involved in the 2000 election case and I think it only takes one judges to puss out or have someone lean on them to flip the case.

How solid is SCOTUS on this?

edit- I actually gave this some more thought and identified what my problem is. It seems like the narrative they're trying to push in court (correct me if I'm wrong) is that the votes were illegal because either they didn't get witnessed or were received late.... that's fine, but as long as there's plausible deniability that this all might have just been incompetence or an isolated fraud I just don't believe the courts will be willing to intervene. I think they should, but I doubt they actually would (probably try to cite some reason why they don't have to see the case). I think the only way you get SCOTUS making a ruling is if they totally expose this as a planned fraud BY THE BIDEN CAMP. The point is, they need to see the public on this being planned before the courts will actually make a move. That means more direct evidence than we've seen so far. Thoughts?

This is fantastic work, but even with how clearly they violated election laws in PA, I don't see how a judge signs off on invalidating 900k votes. Not saying they can't do so legally, just that no judge will have the balls to do it. SCOTUS took a ton of heat for a long time just for getting involved in the 2000 election case and I think it only takes one judges to puss out or have someone lean on them to flip the case.

How solid is SCOTUS on this?