Giuliani used the words "trial by combat" but it's not an accurate description of what he was calling for. There's a lot to blame Giuliani (and others) for here, but let's try to be precise.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_no_one_rid_me_of_this_tur...
In this case, out of context, "let's have trial by combat" seems worse than when placed in the context that marks it as clearly metaphorical - he had just explained what he meant by it.
It's absolutely heated rhetoric, and one example of many - on the part of Giuliani, Trump, and others - that together built a context that led to violence.
It is absolutely appropriate to blame them for that.
That doesn't make labeling it a call for "trial by combat" a good representation of what happened in that moment.
One of them literally called for the execution of the Vice President of the United States. [1]
Another called for "trial by combat." [2]
How tolerant am I supposed to be?
> Maybe there isn't actually a procedure for this situation?
For the 60 court cases? Yes, there are.
> If the highest court in the land says even if the claims turn out to be true there is still no remedy to be had.
Actually, that was the dissenting opinion. The decision was that the petition lacked standing.
> In other words, even if the election was provably stolen
They had 60 chances to prove it was stolen.
I have little sympathy for someone who believes that somehow 60 different court cases were simultaneously wrongly decided.
Move on to changing the laws, winning the next election. This one is decided.
> Shame you weren't there to educate them on proper procedure.
I think they came to the right decision. You're the one who wants to educate them.
[1] : https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-allies-attack-lin-wood...
[2] : https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/01/watch-giuliani-deman...