>>3235043 (lb)
>I could buy that it's "cover" for Flake, maybe.
>But why does he need cover? What leverage exists over him that would be defused by this measure, but not immediately reapplied if the scenario plays out as you suggest?
Could be that Flake is part of the strategy. As with many other strategies, it helps to keep the Dems complacent and thinking they still have a chance of winning (resulting in fewer crazy rioters and FF’s), then hold the full vote ASAP, maybe with the FBI refusing the case or without even taking it to that, and at the end, if his vote is needed, Flake votes yes.