Disputed Election 2020 Results in Key Swing State Pennsylvania

In-depth Report:

Brazen Election 2020 fraud in Pennsylvania and other key swing states rigged things for Biden/Harris over Trump.

If he’s out and they’re inaugurated on January 20, the events of that day will be an epitaph for open, free, and fair federal elections in the US — never again.

A coup d’etat process will have replaced it henceforth — results of future federal elections to be untrustworthy.

In Pennsylvania, the near-impossible happened.

On election night after polls closed, Trump led Biden/Harris by nearly 700,000 votes.

The next day he led by a 56% – 43% margin — a near-statistically impossible advantage to overcome.

Pennsylvania election returns showed Trump winning by landslide margins in all counties — except Dem-controlled Philadelphia.

Late-arriving mail-in ballots were added to the vote count for three days — despite state law prohibiting procedures followed.

Rules were changed for Election 2020 to benefit Biden/Harris.

The vote distribution pattern in all counties was almost the same — except for Philadelphia, a near-statistical impossibility.

It never happened before in state history nor ever in other states before 2020.

Judicial Watch reported that more people cast ballots in the state than individuals registered to vote, adding:

The same pattern occurred in other states.

For Election 2020, “vote totals (changed after polls closed) because of unprecedented, extraordinary, illicitly secretive, and inherently suspect counting…”

Like other key swing states, Biden/Harris didn’t win Pennsylvania. Results were stolen for them.

Republicans control both houses of the Pennsylvania’s General Assembly by sizable margins — 113-90 in the House, 28-21 in the Senate.

Governor Tom Wolf is a Dem, in office since January 2015.

On Monday, 26 Pennsylvania House GOP lawmakers contested November 3 results — a formal resolution introduced at the 11th hour.

Its text states that “(o)fficials in the Executive and Judicial Branches of the Commonwealth infringed upon the General Assembly’s authority under the Constitution of the United States by unlawfully changing the rules governing the November 3, 2020, election…”

It calls for Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf and Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar to withdraw certification of disputed results.

It also urges the US House and Senate to declare Pennsylvania Election 2020 results in dispute — pending a “forensic investigation” of election law compromises, irregularities and improprieties in tabulating mail-in ballots, as well as canvassing procedures.

In a late Friday news release, the 26 state lawmakers expressed concern about issues raised that “undermined our elector process, and as a result, we cannot accept certification of the results in statewide races.”

“It is absolutely imperative that we take these steps if we are to ensure public trust in our electoral system. Faith in government begins with faith in the elections which select that government.”

“Just as Pennsylvania led the founding of our nation, Pennsylvania should also lead the way by making sure our commonwealth continues to stand as a keystone in our nation where free and fair elections are of paramount concern, no matter the final outcome of those elections.”

A spokesman for House GOP Speaker Brian Cutler said he was uninvolved in drafting the 11th hour resolution.

The 11th hour attempt to challenge and reverse fraud may likely fall short as the state’s   session ended Monday.

GOP House leaders declined to extend the session for consideration of the proposed resolution.

A joint statement by House Majority leader Kerry Benninghoff and Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman said the following:

The Pennsylvania General Assembly “does not and will not have a hand in choosing the state’s presidential electors, or in deciding the outcome of the presidential election.”

Adjourning the legislative session effectively rejects a “forensic investigation” of state election results unless judicially ordered.

State courts to the highest level are highly unlikely to approve it.

A majority US Supreme Court ruling appears to be the only option at this time, a long shot one at best.

However things turn out in the state, PA Hempfield Republican Eric Nelson said he and 25 other House Republicans will release a report that shows “sizable irregularities with mail-in ballots between Nov. 3 and Nov. 4.”

Noting significant irregularities in Allegheny (that includes Pittsburgh), Philadelphia and Delaware counties, he added:

“We have some major problems which need to be addressed before the election results ultimately are certified. My goal is fair, honest and accurate elections.”

In a dubious move last week, Pennsylvania’s Budget and Finance Committee rejected a House resolution request for a statistical review of election results.

On Saturday, the state’s Supreme Court unanimously rejected a lower court ruling that halted certification of election results.

The ruling came a day after the US Third Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a Trump campaign accusation of election fraud in the state — despite hard evidence proving otherwise.

On Monday, Epoch Times contributor Ivan Petchoukov reported the following:

“Pennsylvania State Sen. Doug Mastriano, a Republican, said Friday that the GOP-controlled state legislature will make a bid to reclaim its power to appoint the state’s electors to the Electoral College, saying they could start the process on Nov. 30.

According to Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2 of the US Constitution:

“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress.”

Even if Pennsylvania’s General Assembly members choose their own electors, they cannot constitutionally override the popular vote in the state.

The 14th Amendment prohibits states from denying the constitutional rights of its citizens without due process, including the right to vote.

Yet when election fraud occurs — Election 2020 Exhibit A — the popular will have been denied by a higher authority.

That’s the apparent result of the November 3 process for US president.

At this time, the Supreme Court alone will have final say on this issue if it chooses to hear Trump’s complaint.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected]. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”


Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Featured image is from Wikimedia Commons

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: Stephen Lendman

About the author:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]