FIREWORKS ON JAN 6th when PENCE counts the ELECTORAL VOTE UNDER THE ***"Regularly given" *** rules as laid out in the ELECTORAL COUNT ACT see below:
"Regularly given"
The phrase "regularly given" is generally understood as referring to issues regarding an elector's actual vote, rather than whether the elector has been properly appointed. It could include, for example, situations where an elector cast a particular vote because of bribery or corruption, or mistake or fraud. It may also include situations where the elector did not vote in accordance with applicable constitutional and statutory requirements.
If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State shall have been received by the President of the Senate, those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the evidence mentioned in section 2 of this act to have been appointed, if the determination in said section provided for shall have been made . . . . ; but in case there shall arise the question which of two or more of such State tribunals determining what electors have been appointed, as mentioned in section 2 of this act, is the lawful tribunal of such State, the votes regularly given of those electors, and those only, of such State shall be counted whose title as electors the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide is supported by the decision of the tribunal of such State so authorized by its laws; and in such case of more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State, if there shall have been no such determination of the question in the State aforesaid, then those votes, and those only, shall be counted which the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide to be the lawful votes of the legally appointed electors of such State.
FIREWORKS ON JAN 6th when PENCE counts the ELECTORAL VOTE UNDER THE ***"Regularly given" *** rules as laid out in the ELECTORAL COUNT ACT see below:
"Regularly given" The phrase "regularly given" is generally understood as referring to issues regarding an elector's actual vote, rather than whether the elector has been properly appointed. It could include, for example, situations where an elector cast a particular vote because of bribery or corruption, or mistake or fraud. It may also include situations where the elector did not vote in accordance with applicable constitutional and statutory requirements.
If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State shall have been received by the President of the Senate, those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the evidence mentioned in section 2 of this act to have been appointed, if the determination in said section provided for shall have been made . . . . ; but in case there shall arise the question which of two or more of such State tribunals determining what electors have been appointed, as mentioned in section 2 of this act, is the lawful tribunal of such State, the votes regularly given of those electors, and those only, of such State shall be counted whose title as electors the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide is supported by the decision of the tribunal of such State so authorized by its laws; and in such case of more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State, if there shall have been no such determination of the question in the State aforesaid, then those votes, and those only, shall be counted which the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide to be the lawful votes of the legally appointed electors of such State.
(http://www.floridalawreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Siegel-BOOK.pdf)