What is so terrible about letting it all shake out?
I was around in 2000 when Gore did it, and everything was just fine. If they prove nothing, we have our answer. If they prove shenanigens, then it needs to be exposed, no matter how serious, or who ends up POTUS January 20th
And don't let the corrupt MSM scare you about this transition bullshit. Biden is, can, and will do just fine transitioning into the POTUS if that's the way it shakes out.
The Bush/Gore dispute was actually legitimate, with a couple hundred votes in a single state deciding the winner and the ballots had crazy issues like "hanging chads" and shit. In this case, Trump has filed dozens of lawsuits over multiple states alleging fraud with the flimsiest of evidence that gets laughed out of court every time. These lawsuits vary from bickering that poll-watchers are 10 feet away instead of 6, to arguing that millions of votes should be thrown out based on the most frivolous arguments. Here's a taste of what judges are dealing with. Keep in mind that this is a Republican judge...
The Trump campaign’s lawsuit has already been ridiculed by one federal judge for creating a “Frankenstein’s Monster” of legal theories. Pennsylvania went a step further on Tuesday afternoon, urging a federal appellate court to put the beast out of its misery.
“If [the campaign’s] first amended complaint is like Frankenstein’s Monster, ‘haphazardly stitched together from… distinct theories in an attempt to avoid controlling precedent,’ … their proposed second amended complaint is Frankenstein’s Monster’s Monster, randomly re-cobbled together, even more illogical and haphazard than the first,” Pennsylvania’s assistant attorney general Keli Neary wrote in a 43-page legal brief on Tuesday.
The evocative image came courtesy of U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann on Saturday, when he eviscerated what he called Team Trump’s amalgam “strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusation.”
“In other words, Plaintiffs ask this Court to disenfranchise almost seven million voters,” Brann wrote in a 37-page opinion. “This Court has been unable to find any case in which a plaintiff has sought such a drastic remedy in the contest of an election, in terms of the sheer volume of votes asked to be invalidated. One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens.”
Pennsylvania Urges Third Circuit to Put Trump Campaign’s ‘Frankenstein’s Monster’s Monster’ Lawsuit Out of Its Misery