Flag of the American Commonwealth Republics


Having proposed the election fail-safe, the electoral college safe mode and justification of elector override we now take yet another step.....

The Constitution requires a president to be chosen by electors from the several states who have been appointed in a manner determined by the state legislatures. Those who are appointed in a manner not approved by their state legislature are in fact in violation of the definition of electors and thus not being electors their votes cast for president are null and void and they do not count. The states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia, Arizona and Pennsylvania have elector slates which are invalid according to Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution because their electors were determined by other bodies and officials in their respective state without sanction of their legislature. Therefore Biden is actually short of the 270 electoral votes needed to win the presidency.

Since Amendment XII can only count votes transmitted from bona fide electors by definition, we have a situation where neither Biden nor Trump have the required 270 electoral votes needed to win. Despite what governors, state supreme courts, the congressional count or the media say we currently have no President elect nor Vice President elect. Whether or not the election was rigged is another matter. Nevertheless, in this case Amendment XII demands when 'no person have such majority' both houses of Congress must meet under the required quorums and immediately choose by their respective ballots either Biden or Trump as President and Harris or Pence as Vice President. THIS MUST OCCUR BEFORE NOON 20TH OF JANUARY IN ORDER TO AVOID AN EXECUTIVE VACUUM. AT START OF PRESIDENTIAL TERM, SECTION 3 OF AMENDMENT XX COMPENSATES FOR WHEN A PRESIDENT ELECT HAS NOT BEEN CHOSEN BUT IN SUCH INSTANCE A VICE PRESIDENT ELECT IS NEEDED TO ACT AS INTERIM BACKUP. IT ALSO COMPENSATES FOR WHEN BOTH THE PRESIDENT ELECT AND VICE PRESIDENT ELECT FAIL TO QUALIFY BUT NOT FOR THE CURRENT SITUATION HAVING NEITHER A PRESIDENT ELECT NOR VICE PRESIDENT ELECT AS DEFINED BY THE CONSTITUTION.

Should we miss that deadline we will be waiting for the determination of president without an acting president in the interim. Here's a suggested amendment inspired by the deprecated text of Amendment XII and Section 3 of Amendment XX to cover the gap:

If a President elect and Vice President elect shall not have been chosen as defined by the Constitution before the time fixed for the beginning of their terms then the Vice President of the previous term just ended shall act as President (except in nominating a Vice President) until a President is determined. The previous Vice will also retain the power to break ties in the Senate until a Vice President is chosen. If the previous Vice decides not to serve or cannot serve as acting President then Congress may by law declare who shall act as President (minus such person nominating a Vice President) or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected and they shall possess the power to break Senate ties in like fashion as a previous Vice would.

Should they proceed to inaugurate Biden without settling the election through the quorums of Amendment XII it will be a disaster for his party and any executive actions will be challenged and eventually annulled.

-Top- -Links- -Bottom-

*anchor for 'Links'*



'So the state legislature in October 2019 acted unconstitutionally. The governor, by signing it, acted unconstitutionally. The state supreme court by changing even the unconstitutional law acted unconstitutionally, plus violated Article II.'

'They have all these electors, and wait, there's Pennsylvania, well, Pennsylvania's electors are tainted, because they're presented to the United State Congress which will then select the President and Vice President of the United States after they count them, they are presented to the United States Congress, but it could be argued that they're illegitimate, because the state legislature didn't follow the state's own constitution.'

'...unless the US Supreme Court, as it did in Bush v. Gore, exercises legitimately its power of judicial review, we have a potential constitutional crisis in this matter, and one way or another, Congress will have to resolve it on January 6th.' ~ Mark Levin (Posted By Tim Hains) | December 7, 2020

'No, The Georgia Vote-Counting Video Was Not 'Debunked'. Not Even Close'

'Local NBC journalists on site that night independently confirmed "they were told counting was done for the night" and given no indication it would continue before the next morning. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution even reported of a "plan" to stop scanning ballots at the same time the poll watchers said things were shut down:'

'(The video, which shows the room from four different angles, fully supports the claim that poll watchers were kept away from meaningful observation of ballot handling.)'

'Lead Stories claims it is funded by Facebook, Google, and ByteDance. The latter is the Beijing-based and China Communist Party-linked company known for TikTok. Facebook and Google have suppressed journalism deemed harmful to Trump's 2020 election opponent Joe Biden. The Trump administration has said TikTok's ties to the Chinese Communist government makes it a national security threat.' ~ By Mollie Hemingway | DECEMBER 7, 2020

'Trump grew his support among black voters by 50 percent over 2016. Nationally, Joe Biden's black support fell well below 90 percent, the level below which Democratic presidential candidates usually lose.'

'But, when the polls err, non-polling metrics do not; the latter have a 100 percent record. Every non-polling metric forecast Trump's reelection. For Trump to lose this election, the mainstream polls needed to be correct, which they were not. Furthermore, for Trump to lose, not only did one or more of these metrics have to be wrong for the first time ever, but every single one had to be wrong, and at the very same time; not an impossible outcome, but extremely unlikely nonetheless.'

'Statistically abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed. They were unusually large in size (hundreds of thousands) and had an unusually high (90 percent and above) Biden-to-Trump ratio' ~ Patrick Basham | November 27, 2020

'However, the recent effort to claim the Legislature could, through the passage of a simple majority resolution, declare this presidential election in dispute and assign a new slate of electors contrary to the winner of the popular vote in Pennsylvania is simply false.'

'It is true that the U.S. Constitution gives each state legislature the power to choose its electors; however, in 1937, Pennsylvania determined by law to do so by requiring electors be awarded to the certified winner of the statewide popular vote. Should the Legislature wish to change this law, or choose electors in a different manner, such a change can be made only through the passage of legislation to implement a new law that would only affect future elections.' ~ SENS. RYAN AUMENT AND SCOTT MARTIN | Dec 4, 2020

If such rationale were to hold then the Pennsylvania electors would be considered at best null and void and for neither candidate because of the illegitimate changes made to their election system in violation of the Pennsylvania constitution. However, the electors clause in the Constitution renders the 1937 law above mentioned unconstitutional and non-binding. How? It wouldn't make sense to have all future incarnations of the Pennsylvania legislature within presidential elector cycles unable to appoint electors in such manner as they may direct because of a state law albeit passed by one prior legislature in 1937. Such a law violates the intentions and supremacy of the electors clause.

Even if the current legislature wants to voluntarily comply with the 1937 law and rely on the results of the popular election for president in Pennsylvania to determine unanimous electors, those automated results have not materialized not only due to the margin of fraud or irregularities but also because of the election's unconstitutionality under the Pennsylvania constitution. This unconstitutionality is a result of not adequately informing the public of the election mail-in changes and not having the required referendum over the mail-in changes as the state constitution prescribes. Thus no legal popular election for president even took place in Pennsylvania.

The legislature of Pennsylvania should be able to convene on its own accord empowered by the electors clause in order to perform the federal function of appointing electors for president. In fact it must in order to prevent their electors from being declared n/a by Congress on the day of official count.

'3 U.S. Code ~2 makes clear that the Legislature can directly appoint Electors even after election day if there is a failure for any reason of an election:

'The brief clarifies that the selection of a president is a federal function. It is a process of the U.S. government for choosing the federal president. The legislature is not setting laws governing within their state. Therefore, all the usual mechanisms of a state do not play a role. This does not involve the Governor, the courts, election officials, etc. '

'However, we need to offer the Supreme Court legal claims that are neutral, clear, objective, and unbiased. The conservative wing of the Supreme Court will only respond to a pure constitutional issue that is universally true, not just for one election, and which does not cast them in the light of choosing the president.' ~ Jonathon Moseley | December 7, 2020


'Until the mid-1800s, it was common for many state legislatures to simply appoint electors, while other states let their citizens decide on electors.'

'The Constitution doesn't require electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their states, and there is no federal law that requires this. But a number of states have passed laws that threaten to punish so-called "faithless electors," who do not vote according to the state's popular vote.' ~ SARAH PRUITT | OCT 21, 2020

'In the 2016 United States presidential election, ten members of the Electoral College voted or attempted to vote for a candidate different from the ones to whom they were pledged...... Although there had been a combined total of 155 instances of individual electors voting faithlessly prior to 2016 in over two centuries of previous US presidential elections, 2016 was the first election in over a hundred years in which multiple electors worked to alter the result of the election.'

'In the days after the presidential election, President Donald Trump and Republicans have filed lawsuits in five battleground states to contest a race Trump lost to Democratic challenger and former Vice President Joe Biden.'

'Here's a quick look at noteworthy lawsuits from Trump and the Republican party, with details by state below: ~ George Petras | Updated 6:12 p.m. EST Nov. 23, 2020

'The team ran several major analyses including of voters who had moved out of state but still voted in the state they had left; voters who registered to vote using a post office box number rather than a residential address as required; voters who requested a mail-in ballot and sent it in, only for it not to be counted; voters who didn't request a mail-in ballot and didn't receive one, but discovered a vote had been cast in their name; as well as research on people who voted more than once and on those who are listed in the death index.'

"The number of questionable ballots surpasses the vote margin in at least three states right now-Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin," Braynard told The Epoch Times on Nov. 25. Those three states have a combined total of 37 electoral votes.'

"It's unfortunate, but short of a judge ordering a do-over, another election... short of that, I really don't see how you fix this," Braynard said.' ~ BY CHARLOTTE CUTHBERTSON | November 26, 2020 Updated: November 27, 2020

'In recent modern elections, there have been a dozen or more truly competitive battlegrounds which could result in many various paths to 270 electoral votes.'

'That's changed in recent years as polarization has increased, resulting in red and blue strongholds with bigger victory margins. For instance, despite the narrow popular vote margin in 2016, more than two dozen states were decided by margins of 15 percentage points or more. In 1988, when the popular vote margin was seven percentage points, there were just 17 states which were won by such big margins.'

'In 2020, many political analysts think that Wisconsin, where Democrats will hold their national convention in 2020, could prove to be the tipping point state in a close election.'


'By convincing so many of their supporters to vote by mail, the Democrats may have created a problem that could plunge the nation into a post-Election Day tangle of challenges and lawsuits that will make the Bush v. Gore nightmare of 2000 look like a picnic.' ~ JONATHAN TOBIN | 10/13/20 AT 8:00 AM EDT

'The expected uncertainty about the election's outcome stems from states' decision to permit widespread mail-in balloting, a move that opens the door to fraud and abuse and may result in millions of ballots being thrown out by state and national election officials.' ~ BY JUSTIN HASKINS | 10/13/20 08:30 AM EDT

'Since the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention urged Americans to wear masks in public, no major outbreaks have been traced to voting queues. Experts now say that voting with a mask on is no more dangerous than going to a grocery store with a mask on--something millions of American do every week.' ~ Derek Thompson | SEPTEMBER 30, 2020

-Top- -Links- -Bottom-

Commonwealth Party
Constitutional Crisis Alert
January 18, 2021