Addendum: How many other "preeminent constitutional scholars" came out and put whatever credentials they have on the line for such an untested constitutional legal theory that they especially acknowledge would most likely fail? Not many that I am aware of if any. It was unwise for Eastman to do so.Is this why they picked Eastman to present as their most "preeminent constitutional scholar in the US" because he has an "established track record of success in performing the operation that they were contemplating many times with a high percentage of success?" or was it the best they could get who would go along with their scheme? One in which he himself wasn't confident in the untested legal theory that Pence had the constitutional authority to stop the official State certified elector count before Congress, and acknowledged according to Glen Jacobs (Pence's legal counsel) that the strategy would most likely lose 9-0 in front of SCOTUS but went along with the plan anyway.
Last edited: