The article you sent talks about an advanced voting system, which is very safe, and better than the one in the US, which is true. However, the article also says you can audit it, and doesn’t specify how.
The way to verify results by both sides is comparing a QR code that comes with every ballot paper, which should contain a the number of ballot table, and the votes per candidate that matches the one the government has on their system, as well as a hash about the whole results. If the information was altered in any way, then the hash and digital signature would change.
This is all explained in the second article I sent, that I assume you didn’t bother to read.
So, there is a public way of showing the whole opposition party that the government was right: showing the ballot papers with the correct hashes, digital signatures, and results. The government hasn’t provided such public truth, and as such, they’re assumed to have commited fraud, as ballot papers shown by the opposition show a clear win against the government.
In this website you can see the ballot papers obtained by the opposition:
I did read the article, even though it was just another rehashed BBC cable reposted by several suspiciously pro US sources without a single change, almost like they’re trying to launder it. It also doesn’t mention that Gonzalez refused to cooperate with the investigation because he’s not actually interested in the results, he’s interested in a media circus that could lend credence to a color revolution, this is NED 101 shit and everyone even mildly interested in Latin American history knows the playbook front to back.
Allegations aren’t the same as proof, unfortunately, and the word of the US and the journalists it funds ain’t good enough to wipe your ass with. The NYT and all them rags haven’t seen a US casus belli they didn’t corroborate even if history shows all of them to be fraudulent.
This one isn’t different. It’s easy finding journalists to claim fraud when you’re paying their salary and it’s easy to find ballots when you can fabricate them knowing libs think everyone is guilty until proven innocent if Uncle Sam says so.
You’ll notice that article doesn’t just wave in the direction of nebulous claims and inscrutable databases that they know you can’t be fucking bothered to scrutinize (I don’t think you even read the entire article to begin with) but actually has clear examples, provides ample background and doesn’t just take claims at face value.
The article you sent talks about an advanced voting system, which is very safe, and better than the one in the US, which is true. However, the article also says you can audit it, and doesn’t specify how.
The way to verify results by both sides is comparing a QR code that comes with every ballot paper, which should contain a the number of ballot table, and the votes per candidate that matches the one the government has on their system, as well as a hash about the whole results. If the information was altered in any way, then the hash and digital signature would change.
This is all explained in the second article I sent, that I assume you didn’t bother to read.
So, there is a public way of showing the whole opposition party that the government was right: showing the ballot papers with the correct hashes, digital signatures, and results. The government hasn’t provided such public truth, and as such, they’re assumed to have commited fraud, as ballot papers shown by the opposition show a clear win against the government.
In this website you can see the ballot papers obtained by the opposition:
https://resultadosconvzla.com/
I did read the article, even though it was just another rehashed BBC cable reposted by several suspiciously pro US sources without a single change, almost like they’re trying to launder it. It also doesn’t mention that Gonzalez refused to cooperate with the investigation because he’s not actually interested in the results, he’s interested in a media circus that could lend credence to a color revolution, this is NED 101 shit and everyone even mildly interested in Latin American history knows the playbook front to back.
Allegations aren’t the same as proof, unfortunately, and the word of the US and the journalists it funds ain’t good enough to wipe your ass with. The NYT and all them rags haven’t seen a US casus belli they didn’t corroborate even if history shows all of them to be fraudulent.
https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2024/08/03/us-government-funds-electoral-fraud-venezuela/
This one isn’t different. It’s easy finding journalists to claim fraud when you’re paying their salary and it’s easy to find ballots when you can fabricate them knowing libs think everyone is guilty until proven innocent if Uncle Sam says so.
You’ll notice that article doesn’t just wave in the direction of nebulous claims and inscrutable databases that they know you can’t be fucking bothered to scrutinize (I don’t think you even read the entire article to begin with) but actually has clear examples, provides ample background and doesn’t just take claims at face value.