OK, so what you’re saying is, all three states sent something in, (like MI did on Nov 28th & Dec 2nd), otherwise there wouldn’t be a basis for a recount?
And that there’s something to work with (the first certificate), if the recount doesn’t get done on time?
I haven’t found the certificates for PA and WI.
That tweet said that it was certified the 28 the and the doc in the link has the electors names & dated the 2nd.
No. I'm not saying that. All I'm saying is that the list of electors is not the same as the electoral votes, which haven't been taken yet.
As for the relationship between "recount" and "certification," "recount" can and does happen both before and after certification. Certification does not foreclose recounting. Before certification, the election officials might recount on their own, follow state law, and they do so regularly when the margin is close enough. When the "election clerks" are done counting and maybe recounting, the results are certified. But that is NOT the end of it.
I also don't believe that sending certifications of ascertainment forecloses recounting, but it would make things messy at the federal electoral vote counting level, as there could be competing certificates of ascertainment, one with a stale (invalid) slate of electors, and a second one that matches with the electoral ballots.
If the Certs of ascertainment are sent BEFORE the state courts have weighed in, it creates a risk of that. And in MI, it appears that there is SOME process that can start as late as Nov 30, even if invalid, that won't be settled by the state court system until a week or so later at best. I'll add that I haven't studied MI election law, and it may be that there was sound reason to conclude, on Nov 28 or whenever the Certs were sent, that no state court challenge was possible, or that even if possible in theory, the outcome was a foregone conclusion.
Back to "recount" and "certification" in general, the certified loser can CONTEST the certified results in court, and recounting can happen yet again, or for the first time, depending on the whim of the court.
As for the lists of electors, I agree, PA and WI have not submitted theirs. 2016 Presidential Election - Certificates of Ascertainment.
As I compose this post, the following fourteen states have sent Certs of Ascertainment:
Certification is a necessary precondition for recount
That is false, as stated, and what I had in mind was that Certification is a necessary precondition for an election CONTEST. The election contest may involve court-supervised recounting, or even a new election (not for presidential electors, but not unheard of for other offices).
Sorry for the confusion, and my mistake from the get go.