Leamsy vs. Puzkas …


So many wires, so little truth.

… (and some of our questions)

Here is the bodyguard, Leamsy Salazar, and his claims on what happened during Nicolás Maduro’s election in 2013, courtesy of Emili Blasco’s book:

“In the room, organized in a U-shaped pattern, were twenty-four monitors, one for each state, plus a central one adding up the votes in the entire country… On the screens, Salazar realized that they were counting Capriles’ and Maduro’s votes in real time … By 11:30 that day, Capriles … had an advantage of four hundred thousand votes, according to Salazar … By four in the afternoon Capriles was still on top, according to our eyewitness, by 220,000 votes.”

This is when, according to the book, a decision was made to mobilize certain chavista troops in centers where there were no opposition witnesses, or where they could be easily cowed.

Here is what electoral expert Eugenio Martínez (aka Puzkas) says:

“According to the MUD technicians, [counting the votes in real time] is impossible. Nevertheless, they clarify that the theories circulating over social media arguing that Diosdado Cabello and Jorge Rodríguez could observe in real time the evolution of the results in real time, what they actually mean is that they monitored participation levels. In other words, they could count the number of people who had voted… The MUD technicians explain that this information can be known thanks to the Voter Information System machines placed at the entrance of the voting centers (the fingerprint scanners).”

So right there we have a contradiction between the two sources.

By the way, Puzkas fails to say that this is more than just a “theory circulating on social media” – this is the eyewitness account of Diosdado Cabello’s bodyguard, and it flatly contradicts what he – as well as these unnamed “MUD technicians” – are claiming.

Furthermore, Blasco quotes our old pal, former Supreme Tribunal Justice Eladio Aponte Aponte, who said that in earlier elections, “every hour by the hour they [chavistas] would add up the votes each candidate had and they would use this information to make decisions to mobilize.”

So it’s not just Leamsy, but Aponte Aponte as well.

So, how could the system transmit the information in real time?

Blasco quotes Christopher Bello, who audited the voting system in 2011 and 2012. Bello claims that the voting machines had four BIOS (Basic Input Output System) which meant they could communicate with wireless devices even while they were supposedly “offline.” (By the way, Bello Ruiz’s credibility is not rock solid, imho)

Puzkas flat-out denies this:

“The claim [that the machines had four BIOS] was checked by MUD technicians in the audits, and they also checked the machine’s chips. They concluded the machines had a single BIOS. But, faced with the assumption that they had several, at the end of the day what matters is the application and the ports through which the machine communicates with the outside. There are no wireless interface ports that can communicate with the outside. The existing ports are only to communicate with the printer, the fingerprint scanner, the screen, the button to activate the machine, etc., as well as the modem for transmitting the results, which can only be activated once the voting is done and the final tally has been printed.”

So here we have another contradiction – do they have one bIOS or four, or something in between? (I find it a bit disturbing that Puzkas says “faced with the assumption that they had several [ports].” Either or, mister – one doesn’t say “the sun rises in the East, but even if it didn’t, then so-and-so.”)

Now, I don-t know much about this topic, but I find it disturbing that the machines CAN communicate with the fingerprint scanners during the day, and Puzkas himself is saying that the fingerprint scanners CAN communicate turnout information in real time to PSUV apparatchiks. If that is the case, then how do we know that the machine is not sending the votes to the PSUV in real time via their communication with the fingerprint scanner?

What nobody disputes, however, is the anomalous spike in Maduro’s votes in voting centers that stayed open until late. Both Blasco and Puzkas, as well as the MUD technicians, acknowledge that this was the crux of the issue. This is the heart of Capriles’ claim of fraud.

Here there seems to be no contradiction between the camps. Blasco even mentions unnamed people linked to Cabello and Rodríguez Torres who, in negotiations with the United States in several Caribbean islands as well as Europe, admitted they had added votes for Maduro in order to win. No controversy in the “what,” but in the “how.”

The problem with Puzkas’ theory (which mirrors the MUD’s official position) is that one is left wondering how chavismo knew how many votes to add to the tally, and which centers to add them. The answers they provide to these questions is not completely satisfying. The problem with Leamsy’s theory is that, if he’s right, then the MUD is participating in a cover-up … and I’m not sure I’m ready to vouch for that.

The claim that chavismo monitors the voting totals in real time is disturbing, not for what it represents per se, but for what it would mean for the MUD’s credibility if it was proven true.

109 thoughts on “Leamsy vs. Puzkas …

  1. “[…] one is left wondering how chavismo knew how many votes to add to the tally, and which centers to add them.”

    Trends, perhaps? Puzkas explains: “Tener acceso a esta información durante el desarrollo de la elección puede dar luces sobre cuántos electores de los diferentes estratos socioeconómicos y localidades del país están votando y así ayudar a mejorar o corregir las estimaciones de los Exit Polls, basándose en su propia capacidad de movilización.”

    If they know that turnout levels are dismal at School XXX located in Barrio XXX in Antímano, where Chávez got 70% with a high turnout, they may choose to mobilize people to that center. At least that’s how I see it.


    • More sophisticated guesswork than actual surgical intervention, but you’re right.


  2. I’ve worked on every election since 2007 in the vote tallying and movilization area, and from what I experienced, both versions are half truths that complement each other.

    Yes, technically the voting machine doesn’t count votes live; but you do have the fingerprint scanners that do so -this way you figure out participation levels, estimates in the worst case-. No, they don’t receive data that says exactly who voted for whom, or even the bulk figures.

    A lot of the work behind electoral intelligence is connecting dots. It’s as easy as having access to the electoral turnout and the previous results from other elections. Then it’s up to the tech-savvy guys to mix-match the numbers and come up with an approximate that could give them a rather accurate picture on how things are panning out.

    How do they know where to move voters and where to force the voting center into staying open longer? Well, once you have the historical outcomes of each center you simply have to compare the amount of votes per voting center in each parish in order to know who’s moving the most voters. Being this country so blatantly phisically divided -nobody from El Cafetal would vote in La Dolorita or viceversa-, you get a pretty clear picture without having to do much work to obtain it.

    So, every report will say that in voting center A -historically chavista-, turnout is below historical average turnout-, whereas voting center B -historically anti-chavista-, things are running smoothly. You then can estimate that, in the parish with voting centers A and B it is likely that you’re behind in the tally. That’s when you call for confirmation.

    The electoral witnesses and the movilization volunteers proove key in this part of the equation: the former give you the confirmation that the voting turnout is the correct one, the latter step it up a knotch and rally all your votes wherever needed.

    In broad strokes, this is kind of what happens on election day. It gets more specific of course, but I hope this illustrates a bit better how both Salazar and Martinez aren’t technically saying different things, moreas complementing each other.

    Liked by 1 person

    • So they could both be right? In other words, Leamsy only *thinks* he was looking at actual results when in fact they were sophisticated voter projections based on turnout?

      I dunno…


      • The more data you process the more accurate the projection, and I seriously doubt that chavismo lack data on election day. He was watching on 25 screens the work of hundreds of thousands of people spread across the country. It’s not hard to imagine how accurate those numbers are.
        Remember how steep the hierarchy ladder is in elections. It goes all the way from volunteers to the actual candidate, with several links in between. Gathering that much information isn’t really that much work per individual. Think of it as crowdsourcing but in real life: Pedro Perez has to mind the voters of one of the voting booths within a voting center -there’s 16 of those in my voting center, to help put it in perspective-, which means he has to mind about 450-500 registered voters and tops 350-400 actual votes throughout the day. Also, he might have a substitute to make it less tiresome (testigo suplente; you can have up to two of them per booth).
        Then, there’s a guy in charge of gathering the info of each booth in his designated voting center. That’s his job: adding up the voters. His movilization counterpart sits there waiting for orders from big boss, but can (and should) be up to speed on the turnout rate.
        Then there’s someone above those two, and someone even higher and so one and forth until you reach the war room.
        So my guess is what Leamsy saw in that place was as reliable as it can get.

        Liked by 1 person

        • I’ve participated in some call centers of the MUD during the elections, and one of the main things you were meant to ask the eyewitnesses was the turnout in their polling center. That phone call would be repeated many times during the day, giving the math and comp science wiz behind the doors enough information to get a very accurate tendency of the elections. Now, if you get turnout numbers directly from the CNE pipe, your prediction can get quite close to the reality, especially in Venezuela where people express their discontent by staying at home.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Actually is far less sophisticated than that: 1×10, mi gente. They have lists with full names, addresses and cell numbers of their voters, plus logistics like vehicles and Puntos Rojos outside the centers, that effectively counts the votes one by one and send the data via cell phone to this parallel centers (puestos de mando) in real time. This isn’t illegal by itself, but with a partial CNE and, the fact, that is all provided by PDVSA’s money is more than arguable and a vital piece to be crushed for fair electoral conditions.

          I don’t know if this came out in the previous comments, but I didn’t read all of them.


      • I don’t really see the need for them to risk rigging the voting machines if they have the fingerprint machine that does the counting for them already. Personally, I’ve never heard of a rigged voting machine, ever. It’s sort of a myth that you kind of believe but have never really seen happen. Most of the times the machines are faulty is usually due to human intervention: they’re missinstalled, they can’t function properly and some tend to not work at all.
        I’ll go with Eugenio on this one, solely because I wouldn’t need to fix the game that way. We have another “parada obligada” before you can even vote that does seem much more fishy than it does necessary.


        • never heard of “rigged voting machines”? It’s called Hacking, just like anyother computer, electronic system it can be messed with, software and/or hardware, plus transport. I suggest Google for your future investigations.


          • I’m just giving my input on an area I’ve been helping to fight since 2007. Don’t get your feathers all ruffled up just because we don’t meet eye to eye on this. I’m pointing out that if there is fraud, there’s much simpler and “cleaner” ways of doing so, without having to hack into anything. Keeping 300 voting centers where Maduro was favored with spreads of over 60% is much more on point and effective if you ask me. Kicking out opposition witnesses in about an extra 400 voting centers could also do the trick. Add to that limitless ressources and endless lists of the Misiones, and you’ve pretty much owned the thing before you’ve hacked your first 10 machines. It really doesen’t have to be that technological (which makes me pity us opposition even more).

            Liked by 2 people

            • They will need to use the Chavezmatic electronic fraud in full force for the next Presidential elections. (By then, the grip of the dictatorship will be even stronger). So far, they only been practicing, playing a little bit with their infamous e-Toy here and in other 3 world countries they’ve also bribed. They’re perfecting the ” 2 hour e-Fraud Sprint”, from 6-8pm en la prorroga..


              • For the sake of the whole country, let’s just hope our folks will be better prepared.


            • “I’m just giving my input on an area I’ve been helping to fight since 2007.”

              Sometimes when people work on a particular process for any length of time, particularly during an euphoric time frame, as voting can be, they tend to be unable to see that process in different lights. In sum, they marry the process and tend to paint blue skies.

              That’s what I think is happening with mistermoezig.

              Personally I believe that the fraudulent options have had many points of origin to apply to any given situation: electronic, mechanical, and social.


            • Since you like it simple, here are even easier “man-in-the-middle” , hardware massive attacks on various “Sequoia” type, Chavista machines.


      • Parallel “Cuban” Bios available or not, here’s one of the many ways it’s done, real quick:


        • But our system has an extra security feature, one that is very hard and unlikely to hack: the printed receipt. How could they switch the numbers having a printed copy of the electronic vote? (Something the machine on the video DOES NOT provide).


          • Do your own research: Google. Or see what they say and do all over Europe.

            y sigue creyendo en Chavezmatic: las vacas vuelan.


            • Atiliovr has just shown that your video example is rendered null and void with a simple remark, so it is YOU who should do the research to find the flaw you so badly want it to be.

              To help you start, I’ll give you a hint: partly free, not fair.


              • Keep trusting Chavez and his machines, instead of Leopoldo, MCM, ALL of Europe, the USA that kicked Smartmatic out, forghet about the Philippinos right now in a NOIGHTMARE with that crap, disregard all of the experts even from Princeton University or specialist USA blogs say.

                Go like sheep, stand in line, and vote Chavezmatic!!


            • So you expect that with a video of a machine compleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetely different with a completely different system without a paper ballot, and you want me to believe this applies to Venezuela. I am sorry but I feel offended


              • I’m not gonna post every link already posted here about all the hacks and fraud easily proven on all of these machines, the Sequoia types that Chavez bought for you.


              • It is not a completely different system. I posted other videos and links about other similar systems if you look, instead of nitpicking. It’s out there, look it up.

                I wonder if any of you work for Masburrismo, or has friends and/or relatives with Jobs at Fraudmatic.. That’s the only reason any educated person would have a THREAD of confidence in these electronic machines that Chavez gave you.


          • “…the printed receipt.”

            Receipts that the cne will frantically deny to count one-by-one (Yeah, yeah, machine this, machine is very perfect that, we all have heard that…) as it’s happened with almost every election since the implementation of the machines, and to said claims they basically answer “Machine kills votes.”

            Also, you’ve to be really naive to believe that a machine is printing everything in that receipt, what guarantee do we have that it isn’t botching the data after printing the receipt? Or that it isn’t sending a “a pariah just touched me” signal, which could be linked to the infamous print hunters? There are those fabled “MUD technicians” whose name that nobody knows, and that can be bypassed easily just bringing a lot of machines with a different program than the one audited before, no one guarantees that the program running there is the audited one.


            • It is not because of several reasons: remeber than more than 50% of the machines tallies are audited just after the election completely randomly and with people present in the electoral centre. Then all the tallies are collected by the witnesses and also by the member of the electoral centre, one always have a friend or a family member doing that. You can check those results with the ones in the CNE website and they always matched. I don’t know how many I have checked in my life but from a whole municipality to the whole Lara state in the enmienda referendum. I have never seen discrepancies, from neither audited machines nor not-audited ones.


              • Do you understand VIDEOS showing how easy it is to Hack these machines, with malicious software or with little pieces of hardware, even remotely, in many different ways??

                WHY do you think the Germans, French, Engish or Japanese despise these electronic machines and vote manual?? Why do you think the USA expelled Chavez’s Fraudmatic faster than Ebola virus? Why do you think Leopoldo, MCM are now 100% behind manual voting?

                Geezz.. and you still trust the MUD “technicians”? They are worth 3 reina pepiadas and one “solucion habitacional” from Masburro.. You still trust “audited machines” and those that aren’t more than half?



            • “There are those fabled “MUD technicians” whose name that nobody knows..”
              Then you have the “opinionators” and that includes the erstwhile Quico, who HAVEN’T GOT A CLUE about the real possibility of hacking into computers, but CRAFT THEIR VERBIAGE to give the impression that they do, while they jump on their denial bandwagon to say, “no, no fraud here.”

              Really, the charlatanerie is enough to turn one’s stomach.


      • I think the BIOS thing is not a problem, the question if the machines have or not a wireless network card and I guess that’s quite easy verifiable. I do also believe that what Leasmy was looking at was trends.


      • I’m with mistermoezig. All you need is data from fingerprint machines. Multiply the number by historical percentage of Chavismos vote. The rest is easy to do and in fact everybody acknowledges they have done it: leave the right voting center open, bus people to voting centers, re district in advance etc. so far they have not needed anything fancier than that. I don’t understand why people use Occam’s razor on this one. Interestingly enough, this technique will be Chavismos doom as they will count on their historical centers to vote for them, but their own people are unhappy then they’ll loose. They have to go into the election believing it will work as always and people have to surprise them. But with this meme of fraudulent machines there is no hope.

        Oh and by the way all the Diebold examples do not apply here. All the paper receipts and random auditing eliminate all the cited examples. You guys are going to need to study more to come up with a credible mechanism for fraud.

        Finally, why don’t we believe our own experts. What is the motivation for somebody in the mud to not acknowledge that the machines have a cheating mechanism? I mean they do have reasonably capable people. The 4 bios theory seems absurd, it would imply that you would reboot them at each center in a different way than its done during auditing and you now have to communicate this to millions of centers with witnesses, etc.

        Juan this is the wrong rabbit hole, really.


    • I mostly agree with you, I think that´s what makes the most sense. However, electoral intelligence works fine for reasonably big gaps. The method you describe asumes no one ever switches sides (a chavista now voting for Capriles for example) but all the difference in elections is just a matter of who shows up to vote.

      Venezuela is pretty polarized yes, and you could get a reasonable estimate ignoring that some may have voted differently this time. But everyone on this story is talking about pretty narrow margins. Do you think the method would be accurate enough to allow you to take a risky move with such a narrow margin? A 200.000 vote difference could well be within the margin of error of that estimate, especially after Chavez passing away and no real way of knowing how he trend was going to move.

      I don’t know, I’m not into calling the machines chavezmatic or anything like that, but I’m not comfortable either with the MUD language in the reports saying that’s “impossible”. I would much rather hearing they could not find evidence of that happening. That, I could believe.

      But when the MUD says “impossible” I know they are just saying that so people don’t lose trust and show up to vote. Even when everyone should have clear that the MUD doesn’t have the resources to make such a definitive claim.

      I file fraud into possible but improbable. And not really important for showing up to vote.


  3. There were so many levels of fraud in the elections of 14A this comes as no surprise. What is a surprise is that no country in the world pushed to have a real investigation and real audit of these elections. If everything hinges on free, democratic, fair elections then this latest revelation adds more disgrace to all the worlds electoral “watchers” and investigators and all those that recognized these elections. And don’t think that VZLA alone can work out this strategy and no other country is doing the same. This may very well become the generation remembered for some of the biggest electoral fraud ever. With whole governments of Nations who illegally usurped power in countries with unsuspecting populations. Although, in VZLA electoral fraud has been alleged since the first hours of 14A. People knew what went on.


  4. It’s unbelievable that even educated people still trust the exact same machines chosen and funded by Chavez.


    The same machines that were kicked out of the USA faster than Ebola virus, refused everywhere in Europe, Japan, etc. Same machines that stole the Brazilian elections, and that have been heavily criticized in Frauds everywhere, including the Philippines right now, the last victim if the Chavezmatic Chaos.

    There are multiple ways to Hack these electronic voting systems, for example, Princeton University:



    I’m tired of posting links about it here, just google it up for yourselves.

    Of course the MUD “experts” either are bribed and corrupt (Chavista Light Clan) or just ignorant clowns.

    Of course the only way to fight this would be with massive popular support, pueblo-police if you prefer, and going back to manual voting as everyone in Europe knows.

    Leopoldo’s camp is finally realizing this, with MCM, with Ledezma, “voto manual”..

    Maybe after they steal the Presidential elections again, despite 80% against Masburrismo, people will start waking up.


    • Er, ah, commenting as a non-expert in this field, it is painful reading this dialogue. Somebody, somewhere, better find an expert on the potential for voter fraud on these particular machines in use, and bring it to the forefront, …and soon. Make the point, bring everything into the open. This is frustrating..!…

      Liked by 1 person

      • “Somebody, somewhere, better find an expert on the potential for voter fraud on these particular machines in use,”
        “Make the point, bring everything into the open.”

        Agree. And by “experts”, let’s have names and sound credentials, instead of the waffling and the pretense by those aiming to “inform” with a particular angle.


    • The machine fraud began with their first use in the 2004 Recall Referendum, when several machines in an electoral center, for example, after a couple hundred random “yes-no” results, would spew out HUNDREDS of successive votes favoring the no-revocation of Chavez. This was even reported in the then-still free Venezuelan press of the time. Carter arrived with his “experts” afterward, with a computer program to “audit” a small % of the machine results, which program was incompatible with the Fraudmatic programming, and ingenuously accepted the CNE programming audit, which obviously turned up no voting anomalies. The exit poll U. S. firm used by the Oppo showed a 60-40 vote favoring Chavez revocation, the exact opposite of the 60-40 no-revocation voting machine results, being I believe the only time that this firm had been mistaken (and, at least by this amount). The fingerprint machines may well not be the answer to the fraud, since they are doubtfully even connected to a reliable data base (this being Venezuela), if connected at all, as evidenced by 2 international observers who, after seeing a minor girl accompanying her voting grandmother putting her small finger on a machine and being cleared to vote, then registered their own fingerprints and were cleared to vote. The fingerprint machines are basically a device to intimidate voters to vote for the Government so as not to risk losing their meager Petro-State jobs/misiones/pensiones/handouts. The “international observers”, when not Leftists openly favoring the Regime, are often just on a pleasure junket, and are not investgating or even colluding. The Carter Center’s role in calling Venezuela’s elections fair and unquestionable is abominable, and Regime contributions to the Center should be investigated. The MUD will not seriously question electoral fraud possibilities in Venezuela, since they really cannot do anything to avoid it, and are fearful of keeping their own Oppo voters from voting.


    • “Same machines that stole the Brazilian elections”

      The opposition party called for an audit of the electoral process. The investigation is still ongoing.

      We too had an “anomalous spike” in the final moments of the counting.


  5. I don’t see Puzkas’ contradiction on the BIOS issue. A machine can have a thousand BIOS, but the comunication is made through the ports specified by the APP. And when he says the machine communicates with the fingerprint scanner, he means the one used for unlocking the machine, not the one used at the entrance of the voting center… (Have you ever voted in Venezuela?)


    • Exactly. What it is saying there, is that it doesnt matter if the machine has whatever number of whatever, what it doesnt have is a wireless interface. It is not “disturbing” and it is not at all a contradiction. It is just flatly states that it doesnt matter what number of BIOS the thing has if it doesnt have any way to use them to talk to the outside world, same thing that it doesnt matter if your car electronics have hardware and software to control its flight if it doesnt have wings to do so.


      • (of course that assumes the machine you are checking is exactly the same as the machine it is running on the voting station, but … well, then the number of whatever on the machine you are looking at is actually irrelevant too, it may have an extra wifi interface or a hundred for all you know)


        • “…of course that assumes the machine you are checking is exactly the same as the machine it is running on the voting station,”

          THIS is the point I was pointing at before, who guarantees that the machine getting the votes is the same that was audited?


  6. OT, it might behoove one of our very competent Blog Contributers to comment on the 5/1 Investor’s Business Daily editorial, “The U. N.’s Crush On Venezuela Gets Orwellian”.


  7. Ok, I see you have trouble seeing the big picture.

    In 1957 M Perez Jimenez organised a referendum on his tenure, lost and committed fraud.

    Then 1958 happened.

    No amount of politicking, gerrymandering or electronic mishandling can hide a result if it is massive.

    So lets vote and stop looking for the hair in the soup.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Actually I see these “elections” as potential Pueblo-Detonators:

      We know about 80% of the populace are pissed-off, against Masburrismo, even enchufados.

      After these laughable “parliament” elections, where they will cheat of course, but perhaps conceding a small “defeat”.. much smaller margin than 80%.. people will get even more upset, and hopefully continue to doubt the obvious Fraud of Chavez’s machines, plus the publicity, intimidation, bribes.. of course.

      But when it really matters, the Presidential elections, when they will still have 80% against Masburrismo, and they steal that using Fraudmatic in full force, THEN people will really get pissed off and hit the streets.

      It will be too OBVIOUS Massive electronic fraud was committed, again.

      That’s the final detonator we can look forward to.


      • Detonators will work on those who’ve been educated in critical-thinking skills, not so much on sheep, whose lives are based on frivolity and passivity.


        • No.

          remember the past: people reject being victims of fraud. Yes, the latest election was close and many still supported the regime, this time may be different and we may see a wide gap that can’t be closed with sloppy counting.

          This has happened in this country before.


        • Even our passive, naive, uneducated, often Enchufado populace will get pissed off with this detonator:

          No hay pollo.


  8. There was no guarantee that one person couldn’t vote multiple times in multiple centers. Beyond that it really doesn’t matter if Chavistas did count votes in real time or not, since the election was fradulent and undemocratic already. Counting votes in real time would only make it more fradulent, but not substantially worse – it’s already bad enough to basically outlow Chavista movement completely and prohibit any Chavista from standing in an election permanently.


  9. What amazes me is that if chavismos actually did cheat and stole the elections by knowing where and when send their supporters to vote (Which I’m almost certain it did) it means that chavismo can actually solve complex organizational problems using information and knowledge.

    This throws out of the window the theory that they screwed up the country because of incompetence. The’re not incompetent assholes, they can actually pull out complex schemes and make them work, they just want to see the country burn


    • .. means that chavismo can actually solve complex organizational problems using information and knowledge.”

      Money talks. Chavez bought Smartmatic on a juicy midnight deal for over 100 Million, a little betting-machine company of a few corruptos with a small office in Chuao. With that money, those corruptos (Mujica, Anzola, etc) Bought a savvy US company (Sequoia-Dominion..) and the technology.

      You BUY the “experts” buy the right of the software and the machines, and then custom-make your Fraud best way you like. You BRIBE good computer science technicians from anywhere in the world.

      Incompetence is not the main reason Chavismo fails, even Masburrismo. Everyone knows the basic principles on how to handle an working economy.

      Dictorships deliberately mess it up, and the first thing they do to stay in power, always, is cancel or Steal elections. Nothing new.


    • “knowing where and when send their supporters to vote (Which I’m almost certain it did)”

      lo certifico en un 99% — en el consulado venezolano en Toronto.


  10. Leonardo same as happened in the Soviet Union. they can be competent in some very few narrow but important or visible fields , the soviet union economy was a mess in every respect but in areas such as space exploration, olimpic sports , ballet , maybe some military areas they could be top knotch . This govt could be well organized in the only thing which for them counts , electoral fraud and maybe the administration of appearances and propaganda for the intellectually challenged . For every thing else they are total nitwits ,!!


  11. I’m not very amazed but disgusted at how freely people start saying “EVERYBODY THAT DISAGREE IS BOUGHT!!!!!1!!!1!!!”

    All because somebody makes a correct observation about how a particular thing is not relevant in the analysis of the voting machines security or lack of.

    I’m more that suspicious of them in general, and they have been shown time and again to have security flaws that you can drive a truck through, but that does not mean the whole 4 BIOS!!!!!!! thing is a bit of a red herring.

    Also, yes, the machines are suspicious, and there are good reasons to believe they are very easy to screw up with. Which is totally unnecessary in a country like Venezuela, where the whole CNE is bought and pay, armed thugs are at the call of the government, and they gerrymander things to ridiculous levels. With all that, the question that they may have real-time data on votes or just can do a DROP of the whole table of votes for the opposition at will from Miraflores is kind of academic, really.

    Just go, vote, and make them work hard with the fraud – given how the Chavistas run, they will make it in the most clearly visible and thughish way possible, thus giving another good show of why they have to go out.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. I have the distinct feeling that behind the prepossesing appearances they are much weaker than they appear and are much less secure of themselves that they pretend , the Pdvsa presidents data on production and exports are flagrantly fake , even incongrous . From the military I hear almost first hand of dissatisfaction , in fact one big problem they have is that they have a very weak mid level cadres , lots of generals and superior officers , not that many soldiers (mostly raw recruits) and very little in between. Some of the top top big wigs in private conversation let know their doubts about the supreme leader and his survivability ans stuff like that . We see them publicly roaring eipteths and menacng everyone with cutting their heads and think they are formidable .They have lots of inside problems they keep under but which point towards a weaker situation that may appear .


    • ” behind the prepossesing appearances they are much weaker than they appear and are much less secure of themselves that they pretend”

      Handing out residences after getting clobbered with a mango does not give the impression that Maduro at least is in a particularly strong position… but even if the captain is a twat they probably feel like they are on the same ship, so they have to stick together…


      • de parte de Yusnaby Pérez: …Le lanzan un PAÑAL a Maduro mientras hablaba en cadena nacional.
        Abre aquí: yusnaby.com
        (Maduro dixit: “tiene que tener un poco de cuidado, camarada”)


        • ay pero que falta de respeto, Masburro lo que come es mango y cambur, vale..


  13. “Jorge Rodríguez, jefe de campaña del candidato Nicolás Maduro y dirigente del PSUV, estuvo al frente de la operación de monitoreo en vivo, a través de varios centros informáticos que tuvo a su disposición.
    Uno de ellos fue instalado en La Casona, la residencia presidencial ubicada en el noroeste de Caracas. Un segundo comando de acceso fue instalado en un edificio en el centro de la capital venezolana, propiedad del Fondo de Garantía de Depósitos (FOGADE), un organismo bajo control del Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas.

    Otro fue ubicado en La Estancia, un centro cultural administrado por la petrolera estatal Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), utilizando una red de fibra óptica de uso exclusivo de la petrolera, que no está conectado al nodo principal de internet de Cantv, la empresa estatal que suministra el servicio telefónico y de internet en el país.
    Oficialistas de diverso rango tuvieron acceso constante a un cuarto centro de procesamiento de datos ubicado en Plaza Venezuela, en el edificio Teleport, que está conectado en línea al sistema de procesamiento de votos del CNE. (Ver Gráfico 1). Sistema paralelo

    Los servidores ubicados en Teleport, bajo estricto control de Jorge Rodríguez y Carlos Quintero, director de informática del CNE, mantuvieron conexiones a otros centros de monitoreo ubicados en los estados Barinas, Carabobo y Zulia, entre otros, detalló Bello.
    Altos funcionarios del oficialismo acudieron al Teleport para observar las tendencias de los votos, a fin de coordinar las estrategias para “remolcar” votantes de acuerdo a las necesidades.
    “Los funcionarios usaron bases de datos alternas para llevar el control de la totalización de votos en tiempo real, con el objetivo de manipular los resultados de los comicios”, detalló Bello…………………………………………


  14. Tras la inhabilitación del sistema paralelo, detalló el ingeniero en telemática, funcionarios como Jorge Rodríguez, el vicepresidente Jorge Arreaza y Carlos Quintero, jefe de informática del CNE, ordenaron suspender el acceso a internet dentro y fuera de Venezuela, presuntamente por recomendación del ministro de Informática y Comunicaciones de Cuba, Ramiro Valdés, que ha sido un asesor permanente de Caracas.

    De hecho la inhabilitación del sistema paralelo generó alarmas gubernamentales el día de las elecciones presidenciales.Ese día, el vicepresidente Arreaza admitió públicamente que varios servidores del CNE se encontraban bajo ataque desde el exterior, y argumentó que la suspensión del servicio se produjo para bloquear los ataques externos, y no para modificar el sistema de votación.

    “Andan manipulando, dicen que la data electoral va por Internet. Eso es falso, son neófitos o no son expertos en la materia. Nuestra data electoral no puede depender de un sistema como Internet, que es fácilmente vulnerable. Con nuestra red de fibra óptica celular y nuestra red celular se genera una intranet que está totalmente desconectada de Internet”, declaró Arreaza.

    “Esto no es totalmente cierto”, acotó Bello. “La intranet del CNE definitivamente puede ser accesada desde afuera de distintas formas, y eso lo sabe cualquier experto. El único sistema verdaderamente seguro es el que está apagado, encerrado en un bloque de hormigón y sellado en una habitación forrada de plomo con guardias de seguridad armados, y aún así tengo mis dudas”, apuntó.”

    Prorroga misteriosa de 2 horas, cafecito, ultimos toques tecnicos y a celebrar a las 8pm, que viva Chavezmatic!!


  15. Ok. Ignorant question. So, the machines cannot be tampered without the opposition knowing, but there are the fingerprint scanners and laptops. If my memory, does not fail me, you get to the station with the laptops and the scanners, they get your cédula number and fingerprint. To what information does chavismo have access, only the number of people who have voted or also WHO voted? Because if they have access to the cedula numbers of those who voted, you can cross-reference that with the members of the PSUV, Lista Tascón, public employees beneficiaries of Misiones and have a strong trend of who is voting like the screen that Leamsy describes.


  16. Here are my two cents.
    If the government can hack and change the results easily why would they have to move people to voting centers where there is no opposition witness? I don’t doubt they might be able to do it but I think this a measure of last resort that they probably haven’t use yet. Even in 2006 I know of people (that already voted for the opposition but had some deals with the government) that were called in the afternoon to vote 2 or 3 times in centers that had not opposition witnesses. If you can easily hack you wouldn’t need to do this.

    Remember the opposition won one election and the main reason was that the mayors and governors did not provided as much support because it was for unlimited reelections only for Chavez. The second time around Chavez included all the governors and mayors.

    I think that with the fingerprint machines they have enough information to have a very good idea of the results. Remember the fingerprint machine tells you exactly who is about to vote. with that information you can check the Tascon list, the misiones list, public employee list and any other list that lets them know with a good degree of certainty for who you are voting. I bet they can predict by ID number (Cedula) if you will vote for the government or not. They only need to know if you showed or not.


    • It’s not that easy. Even after they used all the other tricks, bribed and intimidated people, propaganda, moving centers,, Capriles was winning at closing time. So they had to use the Electronic fraud, postpone the closing time, a fix it it with additional fraudulent votes to win by the smallest margin. In reality, without ALL of the tricks, Capriles was way ahead, more than the poor guy even knows.


    • “Remember the opposition won one election and the main reason was that the mayors and governors did not provided as much support because it was for unlimited reelections only for Chavez.:”

      While that is true, the other reason the result was not changed as that Baduel made it clear, in as many words, to the CNE and Chavez that any tampering with the result would not be accepted by the important parts military (which was not entirely purged then)


    • 1. This is old news.
      2. The article doesn’t even mention how the system was bled out, not just by the import schemes, but by millions of Venezuelans taking advantage of their “cupo”.


  17. A quote from a certain Quico Toro as a comment on the article by Eugenio Martinez in Prodavinci:
    “En realidad lo esencial aquí son los puntos 5 y 8 – particularmente el 8.
    Ahora, si este es el meollo del asunto, lo lógico no sería centrar un artículo en esos dos puntos?
    Cual, especificamente, es la evidencia de “un inexplicable pico, del todo anómalo, especialmente pronunciado entre las 19.30 y las 20.05 horas del 14 de abril”?
    Cual es la escala es ese pico?
    Que evidencia tenemos de que se haya presentado sólo en centros dominados por el oficialismo?
    Existe un registro explicito de los centros de votación en los que se registró ese pico?
    Cual es la tasa de abstencion en esos centros?
    Existe evidencia de manejos irregulares en el uso de las captahuellas en esos centros?
    He aquí lo medular de este tema. Por qué en la MUD no hay nadie capaz de comunicar esta información de una manera llana, directa, sin paja ni tecnicismos? Como es posible que a estas alturas del partido un carajo como yo que estoy empapadísimo de estos temas no tenga claras las respuestas a estas preguntas?”

    Seems like Quico makes a good point of showing that critical thinking skills seem to be a short commodity in the Venezuelan opposition.


    • How about these “critical skills”?

      ¿Por qué están tan callados ante lo que Christopher Bello Ruiz, experto en seguridad y telemática, que había hecho trabajos secretos para el PSUV y asignaciones dentro de la red del CNE asegura que posee “información clasificada que hará estremecer no solo al CNE y al PSUV sino a toda Venezuela y que Cuba controló la información de las elecciones, en tiempo real, mediante Red secreta?” Qué son las máquinas de elecciones? Las máquinas Smarmatic (Olivetti) que desde 2004 emplea el CNE eran simples máquinas para la lotería y juegos. Numerosos e inteligentes informáticos y computistas señalaron sus bondades y sus defectos, entre ellos el General Peñaloza, Comandante General del Ejército, Director de la Academia Militar, Ingeniero en Comunicaciones que creó el Sistema de Comunicaciones del Ejército Venezolano, y lleva varios años señalando con firmeza técnica que el CNE hizo creer que las famosas máquinas de Smarmatic: 1°.- Se impusieron para facilitar el fraude permanente. 2°.- Envían los datos al centro de totalización en Teleport sólo luego del cierre de las mesas de votación. 3°.- No son bidireccionales.

      ¿Cuál es el secreto del fraude? La realidad del fraude del sistema estriba, además de toda una serie de violaciones a la CRBV, la LOPE y sus reglamentos por las rectoras del CNE, en que existe: 4°.- Una intranet secreta (especie de internet privada, que tiene un número limitado y selecto de usuarios, y el día de las elecciones transmite “en tiempo real” a través de dos redes: – Una de esas redes transmite los paquetes de datos con información de votantes y del voto en tiempo real, cada hora y actualizaciones sobre la marcha de la elección que no van al CNE sino a Cuba. – Otro de los usuarios de la internet secreta es alguien del Comando Chávez. Esto implica que ese comando sabe cuántos han votado y cuántos votos lleva cada candidato. Con esta información, Cuba y el gobierno-PSUV toman decisiones para asegurarse el triunfo al final del día.

      5°.- El General Peñaloza señaló: – “Christopher Bello Ruiz, al sentirse perseguido decidió salir del país, y el día 14 de abril, desde donde se encontraba, logró ingresar al sistema informático del CNE y monitoreó la red cubana, obteniendo la votación que la pasó a Peñaloza, hora a hora, durante el día. A las 5 pm la ventaja de Capriles era del 3%, habían votado 13.600.000, dato que a los pocos minutos, en un avance noticioso Jorge Rodríguez- Comando Chávez- dijo que ya habían votado 13.600.000 personas y que el proceso marchaba bien. ¿Cómo supo Rodríguez de esa cifra de votantes? Por la red secreta a la cual me estoy refiriendo. – Media hora después me reportó que notaba una insólita explosión de votos de Maduro y que había sido bloqueado. – Bello ofreció al Comando Simón Bolívar documentos probatorios y acceso a estas pruebas, que tiene a buen resguardo, y que “posee información clasificada que hará estremecer no solo al CNE, al PSUV y a toda Venezuela”. – “Esa información será entregada a organismos internacionales en caso que a Bello o a mi persona nos ocurra algo”.
      Otras razones para la Auditoría ( LOL……) 1ª.- ¿Por qué no hay respuesta del CNE ante estas afirmaciones? (Double LOL…)

      Inquisitive minds wanna know..


    • Dr Toro is taking an extremely simplistic view of things.

      Please, take a look at the second and third charts I produced in the post here:


      and this:


      One of the problems with “the MUD” in Caracas is that it has as little contact with centres outside Greater Caracas as the usual sifrino.
      It didn’t pay attention to collect reports from where it matters. But then: what can they do? Take to Caracas several people who live in El Sombrero or Negro Primero or Carora and let them declare they were thrown out of the voting centres while a bunch of military entered? And then protection for those witnesses? Right.


  18. Bottom line:

    1.) The inept Venezuelan opposition has been unable to get their hands on one Smartmatic voting terminal for reverse engineering unlike their American and European counterparts.

    2.) The inept Venezuelan opposition including folks commenting here and Francisco Toro, believe these gaming terminals (originally made by Olivetti), are a non-factor in any Venezuelan election because of backups and failsafes and because the cheat is elsewhere. IOW, it’s not the terminals.



    • Alejandro : Do you think that if the oppo or friends had a copy of the machine they would make it public , my guess is that there are elements either the oppo or friendly to the oppo who have full information on the machines and on whether they contain any elements that can be used to commit fraud and will probably take steps in due time to make use of that information . You are naive in believing tha the oppo is just the guys that appear making sweet declarations to the press. Behind the official groups acting maybe on their own you have some pretty savy and nasty people with more resources than the govt can ever imagine keeping tabs on all the regime does . They are gunning for a regime change and have a lot of resources and money to get what they want . Also they may not be as scrupulous as the people up front whom you see in public media. For a chavista pro you are pretty innocent . You should know better.


      • This is true. I’ve dug out some impressive computer-science data analysis and reviews from opposition “sources” about previous frauds. Plus there are many tenacious int’l watch dogs out there for elections stuff.

        I suspect that Leopoldo and the smarter guys of the opposition (well,,, even Capriles here) have been keeping quiet about Smartmatic and Fraud manipulations not to discourage future popular voting. They are merely promoting “Voto-Manual” on FB or Twitter, to a certain audience..


  19. Just my 2 “lochas”.

    Altought it’s not impossible for the machine to have 4 BIOS chips, they’ll be a waste of time and money to put them into the machine, i would say that (in the event that the machine has more than one BIOS chip) it would be a maximum of 2, let’s say that i have the means and store a vote changing program on the second BIOS an that get’s activated and installed when the ballot is started (this is possible) and when the machine finally prints the ballot results, the program (and BIOS chip) it’s automatically erased. i would prefer not to do a very long explanation of how you could do this, but, it’s not impossible. Also, this example that i’ve just given is only one of the many ways that a properly programmed BIOS chip could trigger some random action on a peripheral or with the data on a storage device on the machine.

    Let’s assume for a moment that we have indeed some concealed hardware on the machine that modifies the ballot turnout… then, you’ll have to explain why the printed ballots always match total results, voters, people that didn’t vote in that center and “mesa” and such. To simply put a poll modifier program would be, a daunting effort with little results.

    It seems easier and more plausible, to modify polls when you start receiving _hard_ trends (the ones the machines send out when you close the ballot, in a per “mesa” fashion) this in turn, gives a good _hard_ data to compare with a very good projection that you have on your hands, and then, in every state, you send out mobilizers for those people that still haven’t show up to vote, or any other means to make them _vote_ for you (gifts, etc..)

    Lastly, in those voting centers where there are clearly no MUD witnesses, or, too few to make any protest count, taking advantage of the natural bi-directional communication of the machine (this really needs no proof, it’s obvious that the machine has bi-direccional communication, or else, it would not confirm the total delivery of the data, be it to one of those supposed “Teleports” or to the CNE, if it ever gets there first, heh), you modify the ballot, and re-print audits, make the machine “fail” on purpose, just to carry out the data and use it at will, and hand over a “comiquita” audit to any bystanders there.

    Of course, you need a good orchestration for all this, SAIME and the cubans in ther have one part of the puzzle, having the “cedulación” all in their control, the other part is under CANTV’s control (being that they can _see_ and transport the data as it gets transmitted), and of course, the CNE that do us the favor to cook it for us and serve us for a bitter dinner.

    There is, of course, a rather long and very boring technical explanation (that i won’t really put here) of the feasibility and how easy this could be accomplished, any wise country with, as we say here: “two fingers of forehead” would reject using any type of electronic vote whatsoever (well, if you give me a standard issue dot matrix printer of any manufacturer, this would simplify audit printing, at least) xD.


    • ..feasibility and how easy this could be accomplished, any wise country with, as we say here: “two fingers of forehead” would reject using any type of electronic vote whatsoever”.

      Correct. But we’re talking about thirld-world Corruptzuela here.


  20. The BIOS thing is being tossed around as a bogey man to scare people because most people do not understand what a BIOS is and so it sound ominous and sensationalistic.

    To clarify, every computer has a BIOS that allows it to boot up and communicate with most (not all) of its peripheral devices like hard drive, keyboard, display, network cards, USB ports, etc.

    If you want to see the BIOS in your PC press or while the computer boots up and you will see a menu showing you a set of options. It will even tell you the version of the BIOS.

    After booting up the BIOS functionality is usually replaced by the Drivers which tend to be more up to date and better suited. That means that after booting up the BIOS gets used very little since it is superseded by the Drivers. They have similar purposes but the BIOS typically is less advanced and more rudimentary than the Drivers. The BIOS is so rudimentary that (in most of them) the user interface is text-based and only uses the keyboard.

    Regarding the number of BIOS in a computer.
    A computer only needs one BIOS and no more than one. Having more than one BIOS installed does not confer any advantage to the computer, since they are used mostly to boot up the Operating System and only one can be used during that process. By contrast a computer can have tens or even hundreds of drivers installed, even with virtual devices.

    All this is to say that the BIOS is a very basic piece of software (actually firmware) that is essential and of which there can be no more than one working in a particular computer. The next level of software in a computer is the Operating System which handles the drivers. On top of the Operating System are the Application Programs. If someone wanted to hack a computer they would do it at the Application level or the Driver or even the Operating System level, never, ever the BIOS level.

    Blasco probably was told that among the thousands of voting machines there were 4 different versions of the BIOS. That is to be expected since BIOS are changed and improved like any other piece of software.


    He probably thought that meant that each machine had 4 of them which, even though it does not make any sense, it has a nice conspiracy ring to it (4 HIDDEN BIOS, OMG!!) and so he ran with that idea and published it.

    After all, who is going to call him on it? And if someone does he can always plead ignorance.


    • The striked out part was not meant to be striked out.
      It originally said: “If you want to see the BIOS in your PC press Delete or F2 while the computer boots up and you will see a menu showing you a set of options. It will even tell you the version of the BIOS.”


    • Yep, I’ve wondered what, exactly, was this guy calling “4 BIOS”, as you need only the one to boot the machine and start the basic stuff.. But I was trying ot be charitative and think of alternative explanations. Dunno, maybe the guy was thinking of something like ILO?

      Your hypothesis sound plausible, but now I wonder at what point of the phone game the change from “4 versions” to “4 simultaneous” happened, if it was the case.


      • For me the whole thing points to lack of professionalism by Blasco, because even if he did not understand the technical details he could have asked for an expert opinion on the matter before publishing.


    • The Bios tricks and tampering are simply to play with Date & Time. Just with that, you can manipulate the electoral data in many convenient ways. Why do I waste time sending attachments here from the experts like C. Bello.. beats me.


      • Sorry, but what does “BIOS tricks” have to do with the whole 4 BIOS nonsense we are talking about?

        You dont have to convince me a lot that the stuff is not absolutely tamperproof, but when people start putting this kind of material out, it only helps discredit the criticism.

        You dont have to convince me on the absolutely idiotic idea that is to entrust voting to something that has so many ways to be covertly tampered with. I also got my Computer Science degree, you know.

        From there to bad reporting that muddles the issue is what we are talking now.


        • Cómo puede filtrarse una clave de las máquinas de votación?
          La clave en poder del PSUV corresponde al BIOS de un modelo de máquina de votación. Esta clave, como ya se explicó, permite realizar funciones básicas como cambiar la hora y la fecha del equipo o realizar cambios en la secuencia de arranque. La máquina de votación tiene al menos 20 claves como parte de sus capas de seguridad. La clave de servicio en particular es la única que no está sujeta a protocolos específicos de seguridad. ¿Por qué? Para los técnicos del CNE esta clave es de baja relevancia al punto que es conocida por todos los técnicos (contratados por el organismo comicial) que trabajan en los almacenes en Fila de Mariches durante la programación de los equipos.


          Cappice, Mr. Ingeniero de Computacion?!


  21. Juan, how very sad that you and Caracas Chronicles joins in this fray about the fraud. Once again “rumors” about how they (the chavistas) stole the election by knowing ahead of time the results and changing them comes in a not so good moment for chavism, or do you not remember the disaster that those unproven rumors about the RR caused?

    It has been argued many many times that the machines can’t communicate the votes with the outside world until they are connected to the network. The MUD has had technicians checking this, I doubt that had they found this possible they would not have detected it. The Operating system is also checked by both sides.

    I, personally, don’t find a flaw in the machines, having said that the fingerprint scanners are another story. However, the fingerprint scanners can’t tell who you voted for. What they give those with access to the information is a way to identify the voter with just the C.I. once that information has been accessed then the voter can be matched to a probability of voting for chavismo based on all the information available about said voter (age, gender, employment, etc). With that probability then we can get a rough estimate of election results. The better the estimation of the probability the closer the estimate will be to the final tally.

    So, the PSUV doesn’t really need the votes. They just needed a huge database before election date (which I am sure they have) and a voting intention model (which is not hard to do). Then all they need on election day is to tick those who have voted to know which way is the outcome going.

    Of course, you like many decide to go with the conspiracy theory that there was fraud (as in changing votes, and reading the machines, etc). To me it’s a sad day for your blog, which I quite like.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Iñaki, I think you’re putting words in my keyboard! First off, let’s get the “fraud” aspect out of the way – there was fraud, not because I say it, but because Henrique “Nicolás, te robaste la elección” Capriles says it. The irregularities during the April election seem to be well documented – it consisted of strange happenings in different voting centers, assisted voting, and lack of transparency. If you don’t believe it, then take it to the Comando Simón Bolívar.

      Now, what the argument is about is whether or not the machines allow for somebody to know the vote tally in real time. All I have done is point out that there are several high-ranking chavista eyewitnesses saying that this is possible. All I do is pose a question.

      I think it’s clear from the Comments section that what Leamsy was looking at was a projection based on voter turnout, information the PSUV has in real time. This, by the way, is *also* fraud, because since when is one party privvy to knowing this information ahead of the other one? That is an unfair advantage if I ever saw it. It may also have been instrumental in allowing them to mobilize their voters in key places where they could dispose of opposition eyewitnesses.

      I think you agree with me on this when you say
      “So, the PSUV doesn’t really need the votes. They just needed a huge database before election date (which I am sure they have) and a voting intention model (which is not hard to do). Then all they need on election day is to tick those who have voted to know which way is the outcome going.”

      Basically you are conceding that real-time information from the fingerprint scanners + voting intention model = resources needed to mobilize voters in key places thanks to a sophisticated voter projection model. But that’s also fraud man, because the PSUV shouldn’t have access to that information without the other side having it too, even if it doesn’t provide actual vote tallies.

      For the record, I believe the machine tally reflects the actual votes cast. But I don’t want to offend any more readers, so I’ll stay off this topic for a while.

      And finally, for the record: these are not unproven rumours. They are apparently the testimony given by high-ranking chavista eyewitnesses in front of a US Grand Jury. And what happened before the Parliamentary Elections in 2005 were not “unproven rumours” – if you remember correctly, what triggered the withdrawal from those elections was the discovery that it was possible to tell who had voted for whom. This happened in one of the CNE’s rehearsals. Blaming all of this controversy on stupid conspiracy theories doesn’t strike me as fair.


      • “For the record, I believe the machine tally reflects the actual votes cast.”

        That is interesting, what makes you think that?


      • Juan, whilewe can agree on several things that you mention I still question the fact tat you are basing your article in the opinion of te bodyguard, which in any court proceding would just count as hearsay. I can agree wit you that the fact that the PSUV might have access to the live feed of voters is definitelly an irregularity. And is one that can be solved with proper regulations. My concern with the article and with the fraud mongering in general is that if the people believe that votes are stolen then that will lead to abstention and to demands of withdrawing from elections, which have done great for the opposition and our democracy as you know.

        Anyway, it seems from my comments and your answers we agree more than we disagree, I hopeyou understand what is my concern with the whole lets give credit to the bodyguard story…

        PS. I disagree with you about the 2005 election, that was a mistake and they never had any proof to anything, is just that the pressure to withdraw was too big because we were still suffering the 2004 RR backlash.


        • Well, Iñaki, I don’t think for a second that the abstention movement is going to get any traction. People are hungry for a vote, in spite of all the lack of safeguards, so there’s no real risk that people will fail to show up at the polls. If they do, it wil lprobably have more to do with the sorry state the MUD leadership is in.

          I think the bodyguard story should be given more credit than you, obviously, but that’s just a matter of opinion. At any rate, my piece was just to highlight the contradicting versions of the story.


    • Iñaki: for a moment, set aside the words “fraud”, as well as “conspiracy”, which forms a literary figment of your imagination where Juan’s post is concerned.

      Instead, let’s go for the bigger picture, during the past decade. You and I and perenceja agree that in all the elections during that time, one party has had, by design, an inordinately weighted involvement in the events leading up to the process, the process itself, and the outcome of that process.

      What do you call that?

      And p.s., sorry about all your *disenchantment* with this blog.


      • I don’t disagree with the unbalanced playing field of the last ten years. However, what I want you to look at is at where did it originate… It originated not only in the desire of chavism to control it but also in the poor strategies of the opposition and the consistent fraud-mongering to which we seem to be accustomed as a society. Because this type of article, together with the “evidence” provided by the bodyguard (who obviously is a very credible source nontheless) dont provide any real, court-valid, evidence then we are were we are.


        • You obviously have not read anything, the Dozens of pertinent links here or available anywhere in Google from all kinds of sources, about the Fraudmatic machines Chavez Bought for you.

          MUD experts?! Please. It’s no laughing matter.

          Look at what they did today in the UK: Manual Vote: why do you think that is, all over Europe?

          It will take a Huge Fraud in the next Presidential Elections, where 80% against Chavismo will win again with his Smartmatic Fraud. Then, maybe, people like you will begin to wake up.


Comments are closed.