The petitioner asked for both discovery and for MTG to be deposed. There was the option to do both, but the judge refused. Discovery and depositions were the only chance to actually ascertain the truth.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/08/politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-candidacy-challenge-lawsuit/index.html
Whether that is conventional, or not, what followed was a farce. The judge repeatedly allowed MTG to impugn the evidence this decision forced the petitioner into presenting and to not answer the questions. My understanding of court rooms is that a judge doesn't usually allow the witness to attack the integrity of the petitioner, CNN, Facebook, Twitter and/or Nancy Pelosi with extended diatribes that are clear non-responses to yes/no questions.
Earlier in her testimony MTG testified that NO ONE used her Twitter account without her authorization. Later, every time she was confronted with a post/like, she claimed to have no idea who was posting/liking content. The judge told the petitioner she had answered the questions and to move on rather than allowing them to nail her with this.
MTG brought up Q unprompted and disavowed believing in it. The judge did not allow the petitioner to pursue this and cut them off when they said they had a right to follow it up.
The judge repeatedly refused to allow the petitioner to examine whether MTG violated her oath of office, because that's apparently not relevant. The judge did allow MTG to claim multiple times that Nancy Pelosi was a traitor, who had violated her oath of office, because that apparently is relevant.
He refused to allow them to explore comments she made about citizens going to DC to take over Congress and flood the capitol in 2019, because they were too long in the past and made before she was a Congressperson. 2019 was too long ago to possibly be relevant.
Those are just a few. It was bad.
The reason we didn't get any answers from this hearing is because the judge didn't allow it.