>>13734532 (lb)
If you can, check out a Juan O Savin interview where he explains the protocol for such a scenario.
In a nutshell: Basically two POTUS roles, Executive of the civil government and Commander-in-Chief of the military.
If the military is given evidence that the civilian election was fraudulent, in this case, a cyber attack by a foreign entity, they will investigate those findings and, if found to be accurate, will take action to ensure that the rightful winner of the election to lead the civil government is put in place. Corrupt entities that allowed the fraudulent election to be certified will be dealt with by the military.
Savin's take is that military has not accepted Bidan as CIC, and they are dealing with the investigation of Ratcliffe's report on Foreign Interference in the 2020 election (there was) now, in order to justify the removal, or not, of an alleged fraudulently elected civilian executive.
Military, historically, is not interested in debates. IOW, they don't give a shit if people bitch one way or the other. If they foresee insurrection, that will be planned for and dealt with when the rightful winner is put in place.
Juan O Savin lays his case meticulously. You don't have to agree with it, but, IMO, it's worth a listen just to get that perspective in your frame of reference. It's not muddled like pol/MSM shit. He's going to be either right or wrong.