Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

1.4K

IS IT POSSIBLE THERE WILL BE TWO PRESIDENTS - FOR A SHORT TIME?

The original American Constitution was replaced in 1871 by the Act of 1871. This Act transformed America from a constitutional republic into a corporation controlled by bankers. The specific area of America that was turned into a corporation was DC. This act, and the subsequent rule over America from DC, had no constitutional authority, making it illegal and unenforceable. Ever since 1871, Americans have been living in an illusion called democracy - it's all a political game of deception.

(The Act of 1871: The “United States” Is a Corporation – There are Two Constitutions

http://www.federaljack.com/slavery-by-consent-the-united-states-corporation/)

President Trump has stated, many times, that he was returning American back to a Constitutional republic controlled by the people for the people - meaning he was rejecting the Act of 1871. All that has transpired through the election until now has set the ground for returning America back to the original Constitution. This means that when Bide is "inaugurated" of the 20th of Jan, he will become President of the DC corporation. In the tradition of the original Constitution, and under the authority of the original Constitution, President Trump will be inaugurated on the 4th of March. Thus there will be two Presidents. Remember Pelosi said they would have to drag Trump out of the WH? She knew this was coming. That's why she wants Trump impeached - removed from office. This would avoid the two Presidents scenario.

Prior to the passage of the Twentieth Amendment in the early 1930s, Inauguration Day was always March 4, the anniversary of the Constitution first taking affect in 1789. https://historyinpieces.com/research/presidential-inauguration-dates

IS IT POSSIBLE THERE WILL BE TWO PRESIDENTS - FOR A SHORT TIME? The original American Constitution was replaced in 1871 by the Act of 1871. This Act transformed America from a constitutional republic into a corporation controlled by bankers. The specific area of America that was turned into a corporation was DC. This act, and the subsequent rule over America from DC, had no constitutional authority, making it illegal and unenforceable. Ever since 1871, Americans have been living in an illusion called democracy - it's all a political game of deception. (The Act of 1871: The “United States” Is a Corporation – There are Two Constitutions http://www.federaljack.com/slavery-by-consent-the-united-states-corporation/) President Trump has stated, many times, that he was returning American back to a Constitutional republic controlled by the people for the people - meaning he was rejecting the Act of 1871. All that has transpired through the election until now has set the ground for returning America back to the original Constitution. This means that when Bide is "inaugurated" of the 20th of Jan, he will become President of the DC corporation. In the tradition of the original Constitution, and under the authority of the original Constitution, President Trump will be inaugurated on the 4th of March. Thus there will be two Presidents. Remember Pelosi said they would have to drag Trump out of the WH? She knew this was coming. That's why she wants Trump impeached - removed from office. This would avoid the two Presidents scenario. ------------ Prior to the passage of the Twentieth Amendment in the early 1930s, Inauguration Day was always March 4, the anniversary of the Constitution first taking affect in 1789. https://historyinpieces.com/research/presidential-inauguration-dates

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (34).
[–] • 2 pts

This would appear to have some bearing on your question

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/6511/text

H.R.6511 - One President at a Time Act of 2016 114th Congress (2015-2016)

Introduced in House (12/08/2016) One President at a Time Act of 2016

This bill amends the federal criminal code to specify that the President-elect, or a person acting on behalf of the President-elect, is subject to the prohibition against unauthorized correspondence with a foreign government about a dispute or controversy with the United States. Congressional Bills 114th Congress] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office] [H.R. 6511 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS 2d Session H. R. 6511

To amend section 953 of title 18, United States Code (commonly called the Logan Act) to clarify the application of that section to Presidents-elect.

_______________________________________________________________________

                IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        December 8, 2016

Mr. Huffman introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                             A BILL

To amend section 953 of title 18, United States Code (commonly called the Logan Act) to clarify the application of that section to Presidents-elect.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``One President at a Time Act of

2016''.

SEC. 2. LOGAN ACT AMENDMENT.

Section 953 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding

at the end of the first paragraph the following: ``For the purposes of this section, a President-elect, or anyone acting on that President- elect's behalf, is subject to the prohibitions of this section.''. <all>

[–] • 0 pt

The Logan act has of course been central to Flynn's charges and now, Biden's leveraging of his position as "President Elect". But of course these laws would apply to the corporation. Not sure how a return to the Republic would rely on this statute. Interesting connection.

[–] • 0 pt

So the fact that they felt the need to amend or clarify The Logan Act would seem to imply that legally there can be only 1 President at a time. The distinction between the elect and the incumbent or the current holder of the office.

[–] • 0 pt

It seems strange that in 2016 they enact this law while at that time the Logan Act had never been used. They seem to anticipate events.