PA Poll Watchers Saw 60-70,000 Ballots in Locked Back Room - Baltimore Post-ExaminerBaltimore Post-Examiner

PA Poll Watchers Saw 60-70,000 Ballots in Locked Back Room

Computer data scientist Gregory Stenstrom testifying on irregularities in the 2020 vote in Delaware County, PA. (YouTube screenshot)

Computer data scientist Gregory Stenstrom testifying in Gettysburg on irregularities in the 2020 vote in Delaware County, PA. (YouTube screenshot)

Gettysburg – “No one in Delaware County, Pennsylvania could certify the 2020 election in any good conscience.” That is the conclusion computer data scientist Gregory Stenstrom came to in summarizing his experiences as a Republican poll watcher on election day.

Stenstrom – a forensic computer scientist and an expert in security and fraud – offered a number of shocking observations last Wednesday, to a panel of Pennsylvania state legislators looking into irregularities in the state’s general election.

The hearing – which was held in Gettysburg – was chaired by State Senator Doug Mastriano.

Among the more disturbing facets of his testimony, Stenstrom said he and his Democrat counterparts witnessed:

* Improprieties where provisional voters were given standard ballots.

* A forensically destructive manner in the way envelopes were separated from the mail-in ballots.

* USB cards being uploaded to voting machines on at least two dozen occasions by the voting machine warehouse supervisor.

* A locked room where he and his Democrat counterpart (a forensic pathologist) saw between 60,000 – 70,000 neatly boxed mail-in ballots AFTER all the mail-in ballots were allegedly counted.

Stenstrom also testified that, when he and four other poll watchers arrived at the vote counting center, they had to wait for five hours before being admitted to see what was happening inside. Stenstrom added that he and his Democrat counterparts received little-to-no help from law enforcement, as they witnessed procedural problems and apparent irregularities at the polls and counting centers.

“What was really upsetting to me – the most upsetting – was I had spoken to multiple law enforcement agencies and literally begged multiple law enforcement agencies to go in, in order to prove that nothing (untoward was) happening. You either exonerate yourselves in the process or refute what I’m saying,” said Stenstrom.

Stenstrom said he believes that 99% of the poll workers were, “well meaning, honest people that were trying to participate in the process.” However, the overall effect of his poll-watching experience was akin to “kabuki theater.”

“I said it was all designed for us to see it was entertaining; there were cameras on it,” noted Stenstrom.

“As an expert in this, I think it’s impossible to verify the validity of about 100,000 to 120,000 votes,” said Stenstrom.

Below is a transcript of Gregory Stenstrom’s entire testimony. It has been lightly edited for clarity.

“My name is Gregory Stenstrom. I’m from Delaware County (Pennsylvania.)

“I’m a father, a family man. I was a former commanding officer/executive officer in the Navy, and am a Veteran of Foreign Wars. I’m the CEO of my own private company. I’m a data scientist; a forensic computer scientist; and an expert in security and fraud.

“Leah (Hoops) had recruited me for this election. And I thank (her) for that.

“For the first part of the day it was a poll watcher in the city of Chester, and I was with just another former US Marine officer. And the two of us were the only GOP poll watchers in the city of Chester, which is about 40,000 people. Because of the consolidation for COVID there was seven polls we were allowed to make it to in 22 precincts.

“What we saw there was pretty orderly and exciting – people were excited to vote. One of the things we saw out in the field, was that quite a few people had done mail-in ballots. They hadn’t been updated the Delaware County database yet so they would come in and say, “The database is not showing me on the database I’d like to vote.” So one of the processes was to give them a provisional ballot. They would vote provisionally and then later on their vote would be sorted out.

“That didn’t happen.

“I observed, and the gentleman who is with me observed, seven different polls were the people were given a regular ballot. So they cast the vote and put it in. You know we let it happen a few times, you know we didn’t jump all over them, you know, if happened a couple of times we went up. In all cases the election judges were very forthcoming. Very polite, they apologized and they said they couldn’t do it. But that somewhat spurred me to go down to the counting center on Seaport Ave. It’s a remote building – not much around it – and I wanted to take a look.

“All day long I had been told that there were 10 to 20 GOP poll watchers down there, and everything was well on hand.

“Out of curiosity, I decided to go down.

“I arrived at six o’clock, with four other gentlemen — again, former military and some good citizens from Delaware County. We weren’t allowed to get in until 11 o’clock at night and we had to get some legal help get us in.

“It took us five hours to get upstairs.

“After that, what we saw here is what I really think the crux of this in Delaware County. As an expert in this, I think it’s impossible to verify the validity of about 100,000 to 120,000 votes.

“Delaware County’s got 425,000 registered voters. Approximately 300,000 of them voted – I don’t know what the exact number ended up. Mayor Giuliani nailed that number. But of that number, over 100,000 are in question in my mind.

“What I saw as a forensics expert was an election process that was forensically destructive in the manner it was conducted, with the envelopes being separated from the ballots and going to the other side of the room.

“The problem with that (from being forensically destructive) is when you go to do a recount.

“Okay, the machines did a pretty good job of recount, so if I have 120,000 mail-in ballots at one side of the room, and envelopes at the other side of the room, there’s still going to come out 102,000 votes for Vice President Biden and 18,000 votes for President Trump.

“I don’t care how many times you recount those votes. The value is going to come out the same every time.

“So the notion of a recount in a forensically destructive process is it doesn’t work very well.

“What we saw there was a chain of custody and in all cases, it was broken. Broken for the mail-in ballots; the drop box ballots; the Election Day USB card flash drives. In all cases, the chain of custody and the procedures that were defined by the Delaware County Board of Elections and election process review – they didn’t follow one.

“I couldn’t even red line this multi-page document because the entire document would be – they didn’t follow any of the procedures.

“So, I personally observed USB cards being uploaded to voting machines, by the voting machine warehouse supervisor on multiple occasions. I saw this personally, I brought it to the attention of the deputy sheriff who was stationed there, who is a senior law enforcement officer. And I brought to the attention of the clerk of elections.

“I brought to their attention I objected, and I said, “This person is not being observed – he’s not part of the process that I can see. And he’s walking in with baggies” – which we have pictures of and are submitted in our affidavits – “and he was sticking these USBs into the machines.”

“I personally witnessed that happen over 24 times.

“We have multiple other witnesses who saw it, including democrat poll watchers. And I was told the next day by the solicitors – well actually not the solicitor but the attorney that we had secured – that they said every election, they leave a couple of USBs in the voting machines, and they’re brought back and generally the warehouse manager comes over and puts them in.

“In talking to the US Attorney General McSwain, and other law enforcement officers, I found out that was not the case; that generally, more than two is unusual. So, they denied they did it, but as of today 47 USB v cards are missing. And they’re nowhere to be found.

“I was told, personally, that these 24 to 30 cards that were uploaded weren’t there. Those cards I demanded – they didn’t update the vote live time, they only updated it about once every two or three hours. I demanded they update vote so I could see what the result was, and it was 50,000 votes. And I think as a computer scientists and American and a patriot, it doesn’t matter who those 50,000 votes were. I’ll tell you they were Vice President Biden. But what was shocking to me as an American, as someone who has gone to war, is that could even happen.

“Several other things that came up was, on Thursday, it took us three days for them to obey the court order that I secured with Leah’s help, and the help of the Thomas Moore society, who we thank – incredibly good patriots; they got us in there. They got the order for us to get in and look at the backup offices – which are locked – for five minutes every two hours.

“I was the first one allowed to go in at 1:30 on Thursday, and then again at 3:30 for five minutes. The county solicitor had a stopwatch. On the first time I was not allowed to touch anything, the second time I did.

“What I observed in the locked room in the back office was 70,000 unopened mail-in ballots. They were in boxes of 500 stacked in neatly.

“The gentleman that came in with me is a Democrat poll watcher. (He’s) a forensic pathologist; a very detailed, very dedicated man. He took meticulous notes as well, and I verified with him, “Are you seeing what I’m seeing?”

“We both agreed – as GOP poll watchers, and a democrat poll watcher – that we had witnessed 60,000 to 70,000 (ballots). We had a little bit of a disagreement there.

“The problem with that was by that time, the mail-in ballots had already been counted. So 120,000 mail-in ballots had already been counted, posted, and done. So my question is, where did the 70,000 ballots go? And nobody knows.

“We have a picture in here (that I took) of a large number of boxes that were filled with what appeared to be ballots, sitting by the BlueCrest machine. They were there for about three hours and then they disappeared.

“I thought it notable when I watched it at first, they were taking the ballots up and down. As I said, I am an expert in fraud. I saw the ballots going up multiple elevators and racks. And I think a lot of well meaning people, and a lot of honest people there doing that – they were trying to participate in the process. And I would say that 99% of the people there – the way the process was designed – I believe that people thought it was a non-fraudulent process.

“I heard that said many times. I said, there’s no fraud going on here – I didn’t even bring that up – but I think people saw what they wanted to see and they saw what was intended for them to see.

“At one point I called this kabuki theater. I said it was all designed for us to see it was entertaining; there were cameras on it.

“When we finally got in the back room where the votes were being ingested, as a data scientist, I wanted to see where the data is coming in.

“And I wanted to know the universe of the votes.

“Well the universe of the votes was only supposed to be 120,000 mail-in ballots. We were told there were 6000 ballots remaining. So I said okay, we have a universe of 126,000 votes. And when I get back there, the universe wasn’t 126,000 votes, the universe was 200,000 votes.

“So that’s a problem.

“I think a couple other things is the BlueCrest sorter machine was only manned by one person. You know, people ask me all the time, “How do people commit crimes?” I know there’s a lot of theories here, and I always look for the simplest thing. People are stuffing – you know, sticking USB sticks in; putting ballots in. Very simple thing, only takes a couple of people. Doesn’t take a big conspiracy.

“I think people look at things and they use inflammatory words, you know, like fraud and so forth. As a forensic computer scientist my interest is in the data.

“Where did it go?

“Where did the spoilage go?

“How did the data come in and go out the system?

“So I think as a scientist, we need to look at that; we need to audit that.

“What was really upsetting to me – the most upsetting – was I had spoke to multiple law enforcement agencies, and literally begged multiple law enforcement agencies, to go in in order to prove that nothing’s happening. You either exonerate yourselves in the process or refute what I’m saying. Please, it’s very simple process. Just go get the forensic evidence from the computers. It’s a simple process: you turn the computer off, it’s non destructive, takes moments – maybe half an hour, 20 minutes to do it properly – you collect the evidence. You open the computer. You take a device called a bit blocker. You put it in the hard drive, it’s done under the observation of law enforcement officers. They take a forensic image of the drive, put it all back together, it wouldn’t have taken more than an hour to image all five machines.

“That was never done, despite my objections, and that was three weeks ago.

Lastly, when they said well, we’ve got all the forensic records and so forth. We just learned two days ago that virtually all chain of custody logs, records, yellow sheets – everything was gone.

“All forensic evidence, all custody sheets in Delaware County are gone.

“They had a signing party where they sat down, and poll workers were invited back to recreate those logs, and our understanding as of today, was that they were unsuccessful in getting them all.

“So we have a situation where we have 100,000 ballots to 120,000 ballots, both mail-in and a USB, that are in question.

“Now there’s no cure for this; there’s no remedy for this. As a home charter, we could have a re-election in Delaware County for our own representatives within our own town. But there is no cure for that for the President of the United States. And I don’t believe as a citizen, and an observer to this, that anybody could certify that vote in any good conscience.

“If the Democrats that have a power of this process, had done things to follow their procedures – which they created almost unilaterally– we’d be in a situation where they could exonerate themselves, and they could say, “Mr Stenstrom, you’ve been misinformed. We have evidence here that refutes what you say.”

“But that’s not the case – they can’t do that.

“So I say if you can’t certify that vote, and you can’t certify 100,000 votes out of 300,000, then you can’t certify Delaware County.”

© Copyright 2020 Baltimore Post-Examiner. All Rights Reserved


About the author

Anthony C. Hayes

Anthony C. Hayes is an actor, author, raconteur, rapscallion and bon vivant. A one-time newsboy for the Evening Sun and professional presence at the Washington Herald, Tony's poetry, photography, humor, and prose have also been featured in Smile, Hon, You're in Baltimore!, Destination Maryland, Magic Octopus Magazine, Los Angeles Post-Examiner, Voice of Baltimore, SmartCEO, Alvarez Fiction, and Tales of Blood and Roses. If you notice that his work has been purloined, please let him know. As the Good Book says, "Thou shalt not steal." Contact the author.
COMMENT POLICY

Leave a Comment

Comment Policy

HOME / ABOUT / CONTACT / JOIN THE TEAM / TERMS OF SERVICE / PRIVACY POLICY / COMMENT POLICY