There's also a giant world of difference between the legitimate and founded-in-evidence concerns that foreign interference in the election influenced the way citizens voted in significant numbers in a way that benefited that foreign interferer, and therefore seeking investigation into whether the local benefactor of that foreign interference was directly involved in facilitating that interference, and asserting without evidence that the very votes cast by citizens themselves are fraudulent.
An elected representatives job is to oppose and vote against policies they disagree with, and develop and support those they agree with. A citizens job is to speak out about policies they disagree with and show support for those they agree with. That's all part of the democratic process. Winning an election does not grant you unconditional support for anything that you do afterwards. An electoral win is not a time limited dictatorship.
Challenging, without evidence and using baseless accusations of accusations, the very votes themselves and then using that to stir up your base to violence in your benefit; that is an affront to that democratic process that demands a response. Opposition for the purposes of weakening the current government rather than based on a politicians evaluation of the merits of a particular piece of legislation is a problem, but this is on a whole other level.