Windham incident forensic audit update May 16, 2021, Preliminary results not good, “aging Diebold ES2000 Model A Voting Machines cannot be trusted”, Significantly different results from Nov 3
“We discovered that these systems are subject to different types of unauthorized manipulation and potential fraud,” “There is a reason that Texas rejected it,”...Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton
“Any system, financial, voting, or otherwise, that is not repeatable nor dependable should not be used,”..Coffee County Board of Elections
“Windham Incident: Largest unexplained discrepancy in New Hampshire history.”…Granite Grok
From GraniteGrok.com May 16, 2021.
“The Preliminary Results of the “Windham Incident” Forensic Audit Are Not Good
I believe the preliminary results of the forensic audit of the Windham, NH voting machines as configured on November 3, 2020, show the aging Diebold ES2000 Model A Voting Machines cannot be trusted.
And by extension… potentially the elections across the state of New Hampshire as well.”
“The audit results of each machine are significantly different from the results produced on 11/3/20. Why? The audit results are closer to the results of the hand recount that was overseen by the Secretary of State’s office that took place on 11/12/20, but those results are also significantly different for five of the candidates. This could be due to the fact that some of the counted votes during the 11/12/20 recount were tallied based on clear voter intent that was acknowledged by everyone observing.
Another disturbing observation is the variation of between 2 – 44 votes when the results of each candidate are compared across each machine’s audit results. There’s a miniscule difference of 2 votes for Ioana Singureanu between all four machines, and a massive number of 44 votes for Bob Lynn between AccuVote #2 and AccuVote #4. A potential error of 44 votes is unacceptable in any election – because it could cause the wrong person to be declared the winner and subsequently sworn into office.”