This may be a flimsy theory but I was just thinking, what if "standing" is just a red herring?
Is it possible that due to the influence of a foreign power in this case, the issue isn't that the plaintiffs in the case lack standing, but that the courts themselves lack jurisdiction?
Q always said the military was the only way--is it possible that military courts are the only way too when election fraud involves foreign actors?
The goalposts have been moved so many times what are we even shooting for at this point? First no fraud, then no widespread fraud, then not enough fraud to overturn election. It just keeps happening.
I think we are all just discussing it and trying to figure it out.