WASHINGTON, D.C. – A CNN report from 2006 on SmartMatic, the voting machine company behind recent litigation targeting conservative news outlets, shows that speculation of vote tampering is certainly nothing new for the company and that serious questions around the legitimacy of the voting process for elections involving digital voting equipment has been significant, even at that time, for its software and potential for technology driven vote switching.
The report, which was apparently part of a Lou Dobbs investigation called “Democracy at Risk,” shows what CNN was, at that time, thoroughly investigating including what they called a “labyrinth of international holding companies” which made up SmartMatic, as well as various allegations of vote manipulation in the surprising re-election win of Former President of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, when exit polls had him losing 41-59% – by the next day, the results shockingly reversed.
Coincidently, the CNN report sounds eerily similar, almost verbatim, to what attorney Sidney Powell has been alleging on various news programs, many of which have been targeted by the company through threats of defamation lawsuits for claims that have been called outrageous, ridiculous, and/or wildly inaccurate conspiracy theories.
Ad Disclosure: This site earns revenue from ads, some within content. You can support independent journalism and help us stay afloat by donating or purchasing our merch following us on social media (Facebook |
Feedspot) or just sharing content you like.
The investigative report, which some allege CNN is trying to get removed from the internet, connected four SmartMatic companies at the time; SmartMatic Group NV, SmartMatic Inter’L BV of Netherlands, SmartMatic Corp, and an acquisition of Sequoia Voting Systems.
The report began with focus on Antonio Mugica, the CEO and Founder of Smartmatic, who CNN says received a 91 million business loan from the Venezuelan government. An AP report years later shows Mugica discussing Venezuela results which were confirmed tampered with.
“We estimate the difference between the actual participation and the one announced by authorities is at least 1 million votes,” he said. “It is important to point out that this would not have occurred if the auditors of all political parties had been present at the different stages of the election.”
“They have no evidence to support their attacks on Smartmatic because there is no evidence. This campaign was designed to defame Smartmatic and undermine legitimately conducted elections,” said Antonio Mugica, CEO of Smartmatic. “Our efforts are more than just about Smartmatic or any other company. This campaign is an attack on election systems and election workers in an effort to depress confidence in future elections and potentially counter the will of the voters, not just here, but in democracies around the world.”