Listen to the article
Voting technology firm Smartmatic has filed a motion to dismiss a criminal indictment for money laundering, claiming the charges are part of a politically motivated “campaign of retribution” orchestrated by President Donald Trump and his allies against those they blame for his 2020 election defeat.
The UK-based SGO Corporation, Smartmatic’s parent company, was added last fall to a pre-existing indictment that charged several executives with paying $1 million in bribes to election officials in the Philippines. In court documents filed Tuesday in Miami federal court, the company’s attorneys stated they had been fully cooperating with Justice Department investigators since 2021.
According to the motion, Smartmatic had produced millions of pages of documents and made presentations to federal agents during the investigation. The company believed it would not face charges, especially since a trial date had already been set for several executives, including co-founder Roger Pinate, who has pleaded not guilty.
The legal filing argues that the Justice Department’s decision to pursue charges against Smartmatic came only after Trump returned to the White House. The company’s attorneys claim the prosecution serves to reinforce the “false narrative that President Trump did not actually lose the 2020 election” – allegations central to a separate $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit Smartmatic has filed against several Trump allies in the media.
“The prosecution of SGO furthers their collective false narrative that President Trump did not actually lose the 2020 election,” the company stated in court documents. The White House has not responded to requests for comment on these allegations.
The attorneys drew parallels between Smartmatic’s situation and the case of Kilmar Armando Ábrego García, a Salvadoran migrant who faced criminal charges for past conduct after successfully suing the Trump administration over his deportation. The filing argues that Smartmatic has become a target “for retribution” because it “exercised its right to hold those individuals and entities legally accountable” for defamatory statements that damaged its business.
The original criminal case against Smartmatic executives focuses on alleged payments made between 2015 and 2018 to secure a contract with the Philippines government for the country’s 2016 presidential election. Prosecutors later expanded their investigation, seeking court permission in August to introduce evidence suggesting revenue from a $300 million Los Angeles County contract was diverted to a “slush fund” controlled by Pinate through offshore shell companies and fake invoices.
Prosecutors have also accused Pinate of secretly bribing Venezuela’s former election chief by giving her a luxury home with a pool in Caracas. This alleged bribe was reportedly an attempt to repair relations following Smartmatic’s abrupt departure from Venezuela in 2017, when the company accused then-President Nicolas Maduro’s government of manipulating election results.
Smartmatic was founded over 20 years ago by a group of Venezuelan entrepreneurs who found early success conducting elections during the presidency of Hugo Chavez, who favored electronic voting. The company eventually expanded globally, providing voting technology for elections in 25 countries across several continents.
The company claims its business suffered catastrophic damage after Fox News allowed Trump’s lawyers to portray Smartmatic as part of a conspiracy to steal the 2020 U.S. presidential election. While Fox News eventually aired a segment refuting these allegations after receiving complaints from Smartmatic’s legal team, the network has vigorously defended itself against the company’s $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit filed in New York.
In its defense, Fox has argued that Smartmatic was already facing imminent collapse due to internal misconduct, not because of any negative media coverage. The ongoing legal battles highlight the continued fallout from the disputed 2020 election and raise questions about the independence of Justice Department prosecutions in politically charged cases.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
7 Comments
Smartmatic is a major player in the voting technology industry, so any criminal charges against them could have far-reaching implications. I’m curious to learn more about the specific evidence and legal arguments on both sides of this case.
This seems like a politically motivated move against Smartmatic. While the allegations around election tampering are serious, the company’s cooperation with the DOJ investigation should be taken into account. It’s concerning if the charges are driven by retribution rather than the facts of the case.
I agree, the timing of the charges after Trump’s return to the White House raises questions about the real motivations behind this prosecution.
This is a complex and politically charged issue. While the bribery and money laundering allegations are concerning, the timing of the charges raises questions about the true motivations. I’ll be following this case closely to see how it unfolds.
Smartmatic is a major player in the voting technology space, so any criminal charges against them could have significant implications. I’m curious to learn more about the specifics of the alleged bribery and money laundering, as well as the company’s defense against these claims.
It will be interesting to see how this case unfolds and whether Smartmatic can prove the charges are politically motivated. Transparency around election technology is crucial for public trust.
The allegations against Smartmatic are serious, but the company’s cooperation with the DOJ investigation should be taken into account. I hope this case is handled objectively and without political bias, as the integrity of elections is paramount.