Voting Machines Are a Totalitarian Tool Dressed in a Coat of Democracy: Ex-Intelligence Official

December 4, 2020 Updated: December 9, 2020

A former senior intelligence official who has investigated compromised voting machines for over one decade told The Epoch Times about the results of his study: totalitarian rulers built the voting machines as a tool to cloak them with a coat of democracy.

“It’s unconventional warfare. It is basically a 9/11 attack of the electoral system,” said the former CIA official who is an expert in Latin American politics and counterterrorism.

His big concern is that compromised voting systems controlled by corrupt transnational organizations will destroy the rule of law and democracies that protects people’s freedom and rights.


Hugo Chávez, a controversial politician, served as president of Venezuela from 1999 to 2013, later dying from cancer at the age of 58.

In the 15 years before his death, Chávez won four presidential elections in 1998, 2000, 2006, and 2012, and won at least three referendums in 1999, 2000, and 2004.

But in the past decade, the authenticity of his wins in all these elections was questioned by his opponents and the free world. However, no allegations were verified by a judicial system and the results were also validated by various parties.

The former CIA official and his team found through their investigation that Chávez started to focus on voting machines to ensure victory as early as 2003, when over 20 percent of Venezuelans signed a recall referendum to remove him from his president position.

“He [Chávez] started talking to a company called Indra, a Spanish company which [ran] elections [in Venezuela at that time,]” he said.

After figuring out Indra’s voting machines couldn’t be manipulated, Chávez contacted Smartmatic, a voting machine supplier that was first founded by three Venezuelans—Antonio M. Mugica, Roger Piñate, and Alfredo Anzola—in Florida in 2000 and registered in Delaware shortly afterward.

“There was a bidding for the referendum election [in 2003]. Indra got disqualified and Smartmatic won that. So in the 2004 recall referendum, Smartmatic was taking care of [the counting],” he said.

However, Smartmatic disputed that Chavez contacted them. “Chavez did not contact Smartmatic. Venezuela’s National Elections Council opened a public bid in order to acquire an electronic voting system. Smartmatic participated and won the bid,” the company said.

The company also stated that the bid was originally organized to acquire a system that could be implemented in all future elections starting from the October 2004 one.

In the ex-CIA official’s eyes, history repeated itself in the U.S. great election of 2020.

In June 2004, Smartmatic participated in a Venezuelan recall referendum. After that, Chávez didn’t lose any election no matter how much opposition he faced in Venezuela.

“So basically, it is a new kind of dictator. In Caracas [capital of Venezuela], they had to start trying to exercise totalitarian power,” he concluded.

He said that similar things happened in several states during the 2020 U.S. election, in which the poll results suddenly changed from favoring President Donald Trump to Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden at 3:00 a.m. on Nov. 4, the day after the election.

The Epoch Times couldn’t find related records on dramatic election result changes in Venezuela, which may be due to language barriers.

Smartmatic is a multinational company and has done business in many countries where it also decided controversial elections.

In May 2016, The Manila Times reported then-senator and vice presidential candidate Ferdinand ”Bongbong” Marcos Jr. accused Smartmatic voting machines of manipulating results to wipe out one million of his votes and give the win to his competitor, Rep. Maria Leonor “Leni” Robredo.

Right after the November U.S. general election, a whistleblower with a military background in Venezuela alleged in an affidavit on Nov. 16 that Smartmatic participated in a scheme to manipulate the Venezuelan election results in favor of Chávez, The Epoch Times reported.

The Epoch Times was not able to independently verify the claims.

The Smartmatic said the allegation of the whistleblower “are completely baseless and lack any merit.”

On Dec. 4, Smartmatic responded to a request for comment from The Epoch Times, stating that they had sold election technology and services in Venezuela from 2004 until 2017.

“Smartmatic’s technology was never compromised and its results were accurate,” Smartmatic Integrated Communications Director Samira Saba wrote in the email. “Over the last two decades, we have registered and counted nearly 5 billion auditable votes without a single spoiled vote or security breach.”

A canvas observer photographs Lehigh County provisional ballots as vote counting in the general election continues in Allentown, Pa., on Nov. 6, 2020. (Mary Altaffer/AP Photo)

In the United States, attorney Sidney Powell filed lawsuits in Michigan, Arizona, and Georgia, accusing Dominion Voting Systems used in these states of being equipped with the software designed by Smartmatic and manipulating the 2020 presidential election.

The former official believes that Powell’s allegations are true. He said, “This is basically a terrorist attack into the integrity of the United States’ foundation.”

However, the Dominion Voting System has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing and Smartmatic said there’s no tie between these two companies.

“There are no ties between Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic—plain and simple. No ownership ties, no software leasing, no business at all between them. In 2009, Smartmatic licensed scanning machines from Dominion for use in The Philippines for a Smartmatic election project. That short-lived contract was the first and last time that Smartmatic and Dominion tried to do business together,” Smartmatic said in a response to The Epoch Times.

Article revised on Dec. 4 and Dec. 9 to include a response from Smartmatic.