The New York Times released a deep dive into the Iowa Caucus disaster Monday, revealing issues that go deeper than just a faulty caucus app, including a tabulation system with sheets that cannot be altered once they are turned in even if they contain a “multitude” of errors, and even if they appear to impact the caucus’ outcome.

The Iowa Democrats “certified” the caucus results on Sunday night, giving the majority of Iowa delegates to former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg, even though it appears that Vermont socialist, Sen. Bernie Sanders, actually won the popular vote, edging out Buttigieg by just over 0.1%. Sanders said in a statement made Monday that he plans to push for a “partial recanvass” of several precincts in the hopes of evening out the delegate count, per the New York Post.

But as the candidates spar over who actually won Iowa — and, as a result, should get a push going into Tuesday night’s New Hampshire primary — the Iowa Democratic party is desperate to figure out what went wrong and, perhaps accidentally, revealing a process so rife with issues it’s possible Iowa caucus results have never been correctly reported.

According to the NYT, “[a]s disastrous as the 2020 Iowa caucuses have appeared to the public, the failure runs deeper and wider than has previously been known, according to dozens of interviews with those involved. It was a total system breakdown that casts doubt on how a critical contest on the American political calendar has been managed for years.”

Among the problems: “inconsistencies in the reported data from at least one in six” of the state’s voter precincts, impacting how the state apportions its delegates for the national convention and, potentially, casting the final results of the caucus into doubt.

But, even if Sanders wants to challenge the certified results, it may be impossible to fix any tabulation errors, now that the reports are in and given a stamp of approval from Iowa Democrats.

“Those records,” the NYT says, “known as ‘caucus math worksheets,’ could not be changed even if they contained mistakes, according to the lawyer for the Iowa Democratic Party, because they were a legal record and altering them would be a crime.”

“The incorrect math on the Caucus Math Worksheets must not be changed to ensure the integrity of the process,” the party’s lawyer, Shayla McCormally, said in an email to the Iowa Democratic party chairman — an email that was then sent to the NYT. “It is the legal voting record of the caucus, like a ballot,” she added. “The seriousness of the record is made clear by the language at the bottom stating that any misrepresentation of the information is a crime. Therefore, any changes or tampering with the sheet could result in a claim of election interference or misconduct.”

The New York Times also revealed that the Democratic National Committee might have had a hint that the Iowa caucus was on the precipice of chaos. In emails sent over the summer, the DNC appears to offer Iowa help, clearly fearing that things weren’t as in control as they seemed. The DNC even went so far as to propose draft language for any contracts the Iowa Dems might be inking, allowing the DNC to view and test Iowa caucus applications before they were deployed in the field.

The Iowa Democrats’ nightmare isn’t finished. Sanders wants a partial recanvass, so this could drag on for weeks — well past Super Tuesday, and well into the spring, when the Democrats are supposed to be rallying around a possible nominee, not still counting ballots from the first-in-the-nation primary.