This Windham Incident Forensic Auditor Has Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest - Granite Grok

This Windham Incident Forensic Auditor Has Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest


I’m writing to inform you of previously undisclosed conflicts of interest and bias on the part of the auditors chosen by the Windham Board of Selectmen and to ask that the Senate reclaim its authority to choose auditors itself by, if necessary, amending SB43, or to recognize the authority of the residents of Windham to make the decision themselves.

We want to thank Anonymous for this op-ed. If you have a Letter or other content you want us to consider
for publication, please submit it to Skip@GraniteGrok or

New Hampshire voters have fought for an objective, independent set of auditors, but that is not what they received. Here is a summary of my concerns with Windham’s chosen auditors.

Letter #1 (signed by Mark Lindeman) is an attempt to discredit and stop the Maricopa County, Arizona election audit.

Letter #2 (signed by Mark Lindeman) is a further attempt to object to the Arizona audit procedures while also continuing to try and stop the audit (“stop efforts that could undermine confidence in our elections”).

Letter #3 (signed by Andrew Appel and Harri Hursti) denies that there is any credible evidence of election fraud in the 2020 election and states “we have never claimed that technical vulnerabilities have actually been exploited to alter the outcome of any US election.”
Princeton Article: Although Andrew Appel’s 2018 testimony before Congress on the hacking of voting machines was cited in a Sidney Powell lawsuit over the Georgia elections, he distanced himself from the claims he had previously made about the vulnerability of voting machines, perhaps because of the climate at Princeton University that opposes investigations into election fraud. Despite his previous testimony on how easy it is to hack voting machines, Appel told the Daily Princetonian via an email that “Powell’s claims have little merit.”

SB43 states that the forensic audit team shall include “One person designated by town of Windham,” but this does not necessarily mean the Board of Selectmen. Since one of the Selectmen has opposed even having an audit, another failed to even appear at the meeting, and they made an improper choice, the decision should be thrown out and left to the citizens of Windham. Call a town meeting and you will see how many citizens show up to make a different choice.

If the Senate fails to act, we should follow the guidance that was so wisely stated in our Constitution, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” (Amendment X, 1791) It is time to let the people take back their authority and make this decision, with or without the Windham Board of Selectmen.


Note: Shared Content may not necessarily reflect the views of, its Ad sponsors, donors, or individual authors.

[Saved local copies of Letter 1, Letter 2, and letter 3]