Law professor, cited by Trump attorney John Eastman, says his argument was abused as part of a 'ploy

[jmowreader]

3. Here's the problem with this theory

Let's throw out a state here and say Idaho. Idaho has four electors - one for each congressional district, and two At Large electors representing our senators. We have the election, and the candidate who receives the most votes is declared the winner.

At this point, the electors that the people actually voted for will meet with the Governor and the Secretary of State. They will cast their votes for president and for vice president, and two forms will be produced. The electors have to be declared BEFORE the election happens.

The first form is the Certificate of Vote. It lists the number of elector votes each winning candidate received, is signed by all the electors, and then is turned over to the Secretary of State. This official signs the form, nine copies are made, and the state seal - which is made of foil and has the state's logo printed on it - is affixed to each.

Next is the Certificate of Ascertainment. It lists every presidential and vice presidential candidate pair, states how many votes each one got, and declares one candidate's electors to be duly chosen. This is signed by the governor and secretary of state, nine copies are made, and the state seal is affixed to each.

Without the governor's signature and the state seal, any certificate of ascertainment or certificate of vote is completely invalid. The "sovereign citizens of Arizona" don't get to pick their own electors or write their own certificates of ascertainment, and I'm pretty sure the Archivist of the United States simply threw those "alternate slates of electors" into the shredder where they belonged.