You still can distinguish between the two issues, so I'll clarify one more time, then I'll just assume you either aren't capable of distinguishing the two, or don't want to.
If they can't PROVE to the Court that WITHOUT Russian interference Trump would have lost, then the result would stand.
PROVING that would be a monumental Legal task given the enormous amount of variables that resulted in Trump's victory in 2016, and I'm sure the Democrats legal advisors would have made it clear to them that any legal action launched would be virtually unwinnable.
Make no mistake: The Special Report found that the Russians interfered in the 2016 election.
Whether or not Trump's campaign team coordinated with them (for which "insufficient evidence" was found), is a separate issue.
