Bruce Breton, one of Windham’s Selectman, is the only Selectman who did not vote for Mark Lindeman for the upcoming forensic audit. Bruce voted for Jovan Pulitzer to be Windham’s forensic analyst.
On Monday night, the Windham Board of Selectmen held a public meeting to discuss their choice of an analyst for the forensic audit team that will investigate the largest discrepancy between machine and hand counts for any election in the history of New Hampshire. At the meeting , 3 of the 4 selectmen announced their support for the team of Dr. Andrew Appel and Mark Lindeman’s Verified Voting.
It was discovered the next morning that New Hampshire officials selected an operative who alleged the election fraud claims were fake and worked to try to get the Maricopa County audit shut down earlier this month!
TRENDING: BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: TGP’s Jordan Conradson Interviews AZ Audit Director Ken Bennett — HUGE DEVELOPMENTS Including Plans to Triple Output and Questions on Number of Fraudulent Ballots (VIDEO)
This letter denouncing the New Hampshire audit WAS SIGNED by Mark Lindeman from Verified Voting!
So the local officials in Windham picked Mark Lindeman who is a far-left operative who has NO RESPECT for the auditing process at all and believes it is unnecessary!
On Saturday a reader tipped us off to another indictment of Mark Lindeman and Verified Voting.
According to an article at Fast Company back in December 2019, a year before the 2020 election, two experts working with Mark Lindeman and Verified Voting quit the organization over claims it was untrustworthy and was endorsing unreliable voting machines.
Via Fast Company:
Amid heightened concerns about the integrity of the voting process in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election, two election security experts recently quit Verified Voting, a respected election accountability group, in protest. They claim that it has been downplaying security risks in popular voting machines.
Richard DeMillo, a Georgia Tech professor who sat on Verified Voter’s advisory board, just left the group, soon after the departure of UC Berkeley statistics professor Philip Stark, a board member who sent a fiery letter of resignation on November 21st. Stark and DeMillo believe that Verified Voting has been giving election officials false confidence in their voting machines and providing cover for the companies that make and sell the machines.
The accountability group wields a lot of clout, since public officials rely on its recommendations when purchasing expensive voting systems. DeMillo, a professor at Georgia Tech University, has been deeply involved in trying to fix the voting systems in Georgia that saw widespread problems during the razor-thin gubernatorial election of 2018. And Stark designed a vote-verification tool that has been adopted by many states and endorsed by Verified Voting.
Part of the reason Verified Voting is such a trusted organization is that its members are respected scientists and researchers from academia. But both Stark and DeMillo believe that the leadership of the organization, including its president Marian Schneider, has its own agenda and has begun making public statements about elections and voting machines that aren’t backed up by science.
In his resignation letter, Stark accused the group of being on the “wrong side” by approving pricey new voting systems that replace hand-marked ballots with computer-printed ballot summary cards [BMD], the accuracy of which he questions since they depend on potentially insecure software.
“Our message to jurisdictions that buy poorly designed, insecure, universal-use BMD [ballot marking devices systems] should be, ‘We tried to warn you. You need a better voting system,’” Stark wrote. “Instead, we’re saying, ‘Don’t worry: VV will teach you to sprinkle magic RLA dust and fantasies about parallel testing on your untrustworthy election. All will be fine; you can use our authority and reputation to silence your critics.”
Again, this was a year before the 2020 elctions!
How does something like this happen?