The 2020 Election results in every state should be forensically audited using the same method that is taking place in Arizona now.
We’ve reported on concerns with the results of elections in Massachusetts previously. This is how we discovered MIT Ph.D. Dr. Shiva who had uncovered an anomaly in the election results in the Senate primary in Massachusetts. He identified a pattern in the results in his 2020 primary and he saw the same anomaly in the 2020 Presidential results in Michigan:
We already knew that the results of the 2020 Senate primary were suspect so when a concerned citizen in Massachusetts reached out to us with his story, we listened.
Our reader shared that at the beginning of December 2020, and initially with a request made verbally and in person, he asked the Marshfield Town Clerk, for elections reports for the 2020 local election and the November 3rd national election. He mentioned that he wanted the reports because he was intending to run for local office in 2021.
At first, he was given copies of files that were loaded onto memory sticks or thumb drives in what appears to be an Excel-like format. But, these files were incomplete. For example, the local election had 1,400+ voters but the report had only about 1,100 voters listed.
Similarly, the November election had 16,000+ voters but he received a report indicating less than 13,000 voters participated.
Then, after more requests – and no response – our reader made a call to the Secretary’s Elections Division and described the situation. Within hours of that call, I received an email with several pdf files attached that are lists of names of persons that voted (although in some instances it is not clear if these are persons that actually voted). These pdf files appeared to be grouped into six (6) precincts – but his town has seven (7) precincts. One precinct, Precinct 5, was not included.
Our reader received the following letter from the state to the local town representative encouraging the town to obtain all the information and provided it to the requestor. (This has not yet been done.)
The requestor believes that he will no receive a clean report from the Town clerk. However, if this is the case, then this against the Public Records law.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts reached out to the clerk and encouraged her to provide adequate records to our reader. But it appears no one is interested in maintaining the law in this situation.
What the reader did find out in other research is that the firm that ‘manages’ the local town’s election records and machines is LHS and their representative is Lynn Haas.
We’ve recently reported that a significant percentage of the voting machines in the New England states are handled by LHS:
This firm was right in the middle of the Windham, New Hampshire audit as well: