I just googled Iron Triangle... Thank, I like learning new things.

I did as well, thank you.

Michael Flynn just got pardoned.... No wonder Sidney Powell couldn't officially be on his legal team.

oh...

Talk about Quid Pro Quo - free legal work for a pardon for your client.

@Maw You been following along today?

Only slightly.

It's a shame that there's so little fodder for Robert's show.

I wouldn't worry, Faith and Rob have contingency plans.

I forgot the sarcasm emoji...

@Maw I had an election legal question that might be interesting. A PA State Judge issued a ruling that Blocks any further Certification of the Presidential Election. The PA AG said that it was too late because Gov Wolf already certified the slate of Electors, but later in the article was quoted as saying that he would be filing an Appeal to the PA SC immediately. Since they said it wouldn't have an impact, why bother appealing? Why not just let it innocuously stand? Could a reversal in the PA SC allow it to be appealed to SCOTUS? Why give it any more life?

An AG Opinion does not carry the same weight as a Court Ruling.

The impact is that the election results would be unable to be certified.

Of course if you want to take the appropriate PR move, you'd want to certify prior to your electors voting.

Good question of course.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/judge-blocks-further-certification-of-pa-election-results/ar-BB1bmgvY

Election results do not equate to electors, for the most part.

"This order does not impact yesterday’s appointment of electors," Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro said on Twitter Wednesday. "We will be filing an appeal with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court momentarily."

You've heard of faithless electors I presume.

I see... But either way, electors are not compelled to follow the popular vote.

Not compelled to follow their pledges, rather.

You do have a good question though, I'll toss it to Faith and if Rob has time, he might cover it.

I'm sure with Rudy's production and Flynn's (with the Sidney Powell possible quid pro quo angle), it's less interesting.

despite the possibility of electors being faithless, it doesn't look like there'd be enough to bring Biden below 306 and anyone house rep who is a democrat but whose district went for Trump would all the same likely choose to go against their districts wishes.

@Adam135, you just advanced to level 7!

I get that... It was more of a strategy question. If the Trump campaign's aim is to get a case in front of SCOTUS, why give them another at bat if you don't have to?

Faithless electors are extremely controversial.

As you could imagine.

People don't just go rogue all the time.

it's like political suicide

It's happened a fair few times in the US's history.

Oh yeah... We had some last election for both sides.

It very much would be political suicide in my opinion.

Faithless electors from a half % margin state with likely fraud though?

Wasn't the idea.

Was the idea that electors were the election itself.

Which isn't the case, pretty sure. They have some definite ties, but enjoining someone from certifying the results does not impact electors.

It **could** depending on state law.

But they're sort of two separate entities is my point.

Which is why I brought up faithless electors as an example.

Hope that clears things up.