READ: Penn. senator seeks to reject state’s certification of election results

The following is an announcement from Pennsylvania state senator Doug Mastriano regarding the 2020 election results for the state.

Mastriano Measure Seeks Election Accountability

Posted on Nov 27, 2020

HARRISBURG – State Senator Doug Mastriano (R-33) proposed a legislative measure today that seeks accountability associated with the 2020 general election.

The resolution, introduced in conjunction with counterparts in the House of Representatives, disapproves and rejects the Secretary of Commonwealth’s premature certification of the results of the November 3 vote pertaining to presidential electors.

The legislative resolution directs State Department Secretary Kathy Boockvar to withdraw and vacate the certification of the presidential election.

Earlier this week, the Senate Majority Policy Committee hosted a public hearing in Gettysburg – hosted by Mastriano – and testimony revealed numerous electoral irregularities in Pennsylvania.

“Pennsylvanians want transparency and accountability with our electoral process – it is the hallmark of our American system to ensure that we the people select our government leaders, including the President of the United States,” said Mastriano. “As state legislators, we take our responsibility to guard and guarantee our constituents’ right to free and fair elections. I fought to defend this right for three decades…nothing is more sacred in our democracy.”

Mastriano is partnering with Senators Michele Brooks (R-50), Dave Arnold (R-48) and Mario Scavello (R-40).

The resolution declares that the selection of presidential electors is in dispute.

Earlier on Friday, members of the House delegation announced their intent to introduce mirror legislation.

Mastriano noted numerous discrepancies that occurred November 3,  such as failure to meet the requirement that all mail-in ballots are received by 8 p.m.; “satellite locations” being used outside of parameters set by state law; failure to meet requirements specifying that election officials must authenticate signatures of in-person voters; and – among other issues – failure to follow the law for the tabulation of defective absentee and mailed ballots.

Testimony from Wednesday’s hearing is available at

Support the fight against government overreach in Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI for the government computer intrusions.
Thanks to the thousands who have already supported!

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

18 thoughts on “READ: Penn. senator seeks to reject state’s certification of election results”


    Please look into this file. This is the biggest cover-up in human history. This is indisputable proof, just ask any Quantum Physicist.. This will affect the future of all 7 billion people on earth. There is only 2 more months on this election results, but this will go well into the next year.

  2. Any fraud in any vote must be overturned period I do not want a fraudulent
    Elected official anywhere in my government this bull shit of finding out years later we were screwed has to stop or do away with government altogether this is crap we want what we asked for or nothing period

  3. Legislators and not courts, governors, secretaries of state or even SCOTUS judges have any say, let alone the final say, over how a state conducts the way its legal residents vote. That is Constitutional Law 101. The legislators can condemn the certification and that is where it gets dicy because the Congress will look at certified votes, submitted to them, that the legislature feels is not associated with the existing law. Congress will have to make a decision. The law was never amended to allow certain last minute provisions which the court and not the legislators treated as law. The legislators have plenary power and the courts have no power. Their job is to remind everyone that they can to nothing. There is also an equal protection consideration since mail in ballot voters were given consideration on identification and arrival deadlines not afforded those which voted in person. On this challenge the SCOTUS can intercede.

    1. “Constitutional Law 101” — You need to read the entire Article II. The US Constitution also gives the US Congress the power to decide the day (“time”) on which electors are to be chosen. The US Congress has done so in 3 U.S. Code § 1, and the day this year was Nov. 3.

      If a state legislature wanted to change the manner in which electors are appointed, the US Constitution requires that they needed to have done this BEFORE Nov. 3rd, by changing their own state laws. If a state selected its electors on a day other than Nov. 3, it would violate federal law, and that slate could therefore not be counted. 

  4. The State Senator was on with Steve Bannon this morning 11/27/20
    (War Room Pandemic #541) He said the power to seat Electors has by statute always been a function of the Congress but was voluntarily given to the Secretary’s Office in 1938.Their goal is to take it back by using the Resolution process since it doesn’t need to go through the Governor’s Office to get his signature, saving time which is going to be at a premium. While he’s got sign-ons in both Senate and House, they still need to swear in the newly elected Senators and Reps. so they’ll have a full session.
    They still need to get warm bodies in the seats in order to call an Open Session of Congress, so while he’s optimistic about the plan, he says he needs as many Pennsylvania residents as possible to get this information and to contact their State Legislators and push them to get back for this Important Resolution.

  5. I love you tenacity and commitment to truth and fairness. I have turned several people over the past couple of years to hear your battles in these arenas crucial to the America we all cherish. May God be with you in this fight.

  6. Happy to see people like you standing with our President. 72,000,000 plus Patriots know that there was a very concerted effort to steal this election. The mere idea of washing this over and then asking for unity is absurd. For an investigate reporter this is a gold mine for you, just be careful. The left are totally nuts. This treasonous effort runs very deep. I am actually fairly optimistic that President Trump will pull this off. He has some of the most brilliant legal minds in the country, they are motivated and our President gets done what he puts his mind to. I have actually come up with an idea that would be good for the country and get rid of Amazon, that’s for later. O’Reilley was saying to Hannity that because SCOTUS was aware that if the cry baby dems didn’t get their way there would be violence and possibly because of this would vote against the Trump team. With Thomas, Alito, Gorsch ?, ACB, etc. I would say we have a very good shot. Trump will not put up with anymore of the violence. SCOTUS just needs to do their job, easy peasy and do not defer. I likened what O’Reilley said, to say my neighbor being violent and coming over and hurting one of mine. Does O’Reilley really think for one second I would not go over to this home to dispense justice because my neighbor may be violent? I say lets get this done and get back on track.
    Keep the articles coming, knowledge is power

  7. All states,should and are required by law to provide are transparent and free from voter fraud elections, Any state or government body or political party interfering with this process of free transparent an by the laws set forth should be held accountable to the act of treason. And should be punished as so.

  8. Mastriano and team,
    Thank you for your courageous move to fight for the protection of our freedoms and bringing forth a honest vote from the lie machine or most commonly known as democrats . Keep up the good fight because we all know what went on .

  9. God bless them for standing up for what is right! This is for we the people because tjis is a stolen election
    If lee allow this there will never be another election worth voting for . God help us in this matter!

  10. I think one of the most damning things in the hearing was about the vote spikes. I can understand there may be spikes when a bunch of mail in ballots are loaded. I cannot understand the HUGE disparity in votes for each candidate. It seems statistally impossible. I am just an average citizen, but I am employed in a math field. I think if this point was explained to the people in even more basic terms with more exact numbers and compared to the average rate of these mail ballot loads elsewhere, it could have a big impact. Statistical math can be hard for some to understand. This, to me, is a huge point to make clear, as it involves hundreds of thousands of votes.

  11. We recieved a mail in and we didnt ask for one. There shouldn’t of been anything on the june ballet for the nov. Ballet. My husband and myself diont agree how this mail-in ballets were handled. We should of had to request it just like the june ballet. My question is why did we have to void the mail in in order to vote in person when all i should of done was fill in in and put it in the machine?

Scroll to Top