Sadly, there are some people in social media who thinks that after reading up a topic, say automated election, they think and act like an expert by challenging the professionals or the experts.
A perfect example that fits the description is none other than Jover Laurio of Pinoy Ako Blog who just brushed up on matters related to Smartmatic and the automated election for two days because Bongbong Marcos’s trolls were bugging her to make a comment on behalf of Robredo.
After studying the allegations of Atty. Glenn Chong in the senate hearing, Jover mustered enough confidence to take on the former and attempted to debunk CHong’s allegations of massive cheating by exploiting the loopholes of Smartmatic’s automated election system point by point.
Below are major points raised by Jover Laurio in her blog post recently titled, “In Reply to Glen Chong”.
1. Laurio said Glenn Chong’s theory echoed that SP Tito Sotto III that on May 8, 2016, it was already election day in Ragay, Camarines Sur because there were already a transmission of votes was flawed.
Laurio quoted Comelec’s explanation that this “query” is part of the Final Testing and Sealing (FTS), that is to test the ability of the VCM’s to connect with the servers come election day.
Laurio said they were mere “query” by the VCM does not automatically elicit the conclusion that votes have been transmitted during the “query’. That is why no records were noted in log file of the machines because no transmission actually occurred.
Chong dismissed Chong’s allegation as “imbento”, drama and pure propaganda.
Laurio cited geography as the reason why some teachers from far-flung areas were late in doing the Final Testing and Sealing (FTS) because it took them days to transport the VCM’s from the local Comelec office to their designated voting centers.
Laurio made Biliran as an example to drive home her point to Chong, who hails from that province.
To close her argument in point 1, Laurio asked Chong if understands how CCS works? Assuming Chong was not aware, Laurio went on to explain the mechanics of CCS.
Alam mo ba ang CCS? Consolidating and Canvassing System. Kung totoo ang sinasabi mo na may transmission of votes na nangyari, May 8 palang, hindi ito papayagan ng CCS, kasi po may mechanism ang software na to to reject subsequent transmissions. Thus, if the CCS logs can show that results have been received on the night of May 9 (after elections), then the early transmission na pinagkukuda mo ay isang malaking guni-guni.
2. Laurio dismissed Chong’s claim that Comelec server was allegedly accessed by a foreign-based machine (E360SYNC), during and after the elections as baseless.
Laurio reminded Chong what Comelec said about E360SYNC and that its purpose was to push the data from VCM to servers because that’s an integral part of the mechanism of the system.
3. Laurio posted a photo where Chong can be seen attending a briefing for the return of 1,356 VCM’s to Smartmatic to debunk Chong’s claim he was not of BBM’s lawyers.
If you’d recall, Chong denied ever acting as BBM’s representative or lawyer when Drilon confronted him a copy of of the letter from Atty. Ver Garcia, BBM’s lawyer in last week’s senate hearing, inviting Chong to become one of Marcos’s reps for a election protest related activity.
4. And lastly, Laurio resurrected the case against Chong versus the Comelec in violation of Section 261 (z) (12) of the Omnibus Election Code or the prohibition of bringing of voter’s receipts outside of polling precincts.
If you go over the document, Chong and company were accused of stealing official ballots from the Baguio City Comelec warehouse.
In other words, Laurio reminded Chong of a favorite legal adage that says, “He who comes to court must do so with clean hands.”
If you want to read Laurio’s blog post, “In reply to Glenn Chong” please click the link here.
Laurio’s reply to Glenn Chong was a “huge hit” among the LP supporters, gathering 47K shares on Facebook ( not sure if these are organic) if you factor in the low engagement generated by the blog post that attracted only 187 comments.
You can only imagine Laurio must be grinning from ear to ear, basking in glory after her blog post taking election lawyer to school in automated election matters got good reviews from her Fblog followers.
However, as the saying goes, “the higher you fly, the further you fall.”
Election lawyer Glenn Chong did not waste time and went on to demolish every points raised by Jover Laurio in her blog post “In reply to Glenn Chong” on Facebook.
Chong’s reply to Jover Laurio is a good reminder to every amateurs out there, that taking on the professionals in their turfs, is bad for your self-esteem.
Unless, you can stomach the jeers and sneers from the public for the humiliation you get from the experts.
Read Chong’s long reply to Jover Laurio below.
SAGOT KAY JOVER LAURIO
Dear Ms. Jover Laurio,
Akala ko ba ay may modicum of decorum kayo sa pagsusulat. Reading your letter, it seems that even the most rudimentary courtesies of the streets do not apply in your case. While I do not wish to stoop down to your level, I am more than compelled na hindi umatras ng kahit isang pulgada man lang ng lupa sa pakikipaglaban sa mga mandaraya sa halalan. Let’s begin.
Bakit kayo nagreply sa akin gayong hindi ko naman kayo sinulatan? Nagpapapansin kayo o gusto ninyong sumawsaw lamang sa isyung wala naman talaga kayong alam?
Mali pa ang spelling ng pangalan ko. At hindi po privilege speech yan – ang tama ay privileged, as in my “D” sa dulo.
Sabi mo nag-aral ka muna sa isyu bago sumulat. Well, your letter unmask your utter want of study. Kulang po ang inyong pag-aaral. Mali-mali pa. Here’s why?
Reading from your letter from the uplands to the lowlands, Biliran can be traveled from point A to point B in less than 6 hours anywhere across the island and even around the island. Therefore, the premise or example na sinabi mo sa inyong letter ay mali. Simula pa lang yan ha!
As I have said sa hearing, you can review the video for God knows how many times it will take your brain to understand my simple explanation, ang transmission infrastructure ay may 2 bahagi. Ang ipinakita ko sa hearing ay Part 1 lamang. The QUERY part. Hindi ko pa ipinakita ang Part 2. The TRANSMISSION part. I know how to wage my battle and I am not stupid to share it with you. Be that as it may, magpapadala lamang ang VCM ng QUERY kung may resulta na ito. At the point of Part 1, sa QUERY part pa lamang, may hawak ng resulta ang makina. And on May 8, 8.40 ng umaga, nang magpadala ng QUERY ang VCM sa Ragay, wala pang botohan. Bakit may resulta na siya?
Mahirap bang intindihin ang kababalaghang ito? For those with 100% functioning brains, it is easy and simple to understand. But for those with just 25% functioning brains, it is understandable that they will obviously grapple for understanding. Kaya ang katotohanan sa inyo ay imbento, drama at propaganda dahil nga 25% lang ng utak ang gumagana. This is perfectly natural for people of your kind!
And speaking of the clueless… Ano kamo ang CCS? Consolidating and Canvassing System? Consolidation yan, hindi Consolidating.
Sabi mo may mechanism ang software ng CCS na i-reject ang subsequent o sumunod na transmission. Kaya sabi mo “if the CCS logs can show that results have been received on the night of May 9 (after elections), then the early transmission na pinagkukuda mo ay isang malaking guni-guni.”
Something is really wrong with your brain, girl! Going by your own argument, sabi mo i-reject ng CCS ang subsequent o sumunod na transmission dahil ang tatanggapin lang niya ay yung nauna. This is the clear, logical and necessary consequence ng inyong statement.
In this regard, tama ka, girl. But not because your brain is working. It is due to sheer luck. Sinuwerte ka lang talaga. Now, let us look at Ragay. Ang presinto na ito ay nagpadala ng resulta noong May 8. This is the prior o naunang resulta. Ang resulta ng presintong ito sa araw ng halalan, May 9, ang siyang subsequent o sumunod na resulta. Gets mo ang reference in time?
Kaya ang peke at madayang resulta noong May 8 sa presintong ito ang siyang pumasok at tinanggap ng CCS at ang totoong resulta ng nasabing presinto sa araw ng halalan ang siyang ni-reject ng CCS. Ulitin ko, ang peke at madayang resulta noong May 8 ang nakapasok sa canvassing system dahil ang totoong resulta ay lumabas nang sumunod na araw pa, May 9. Nauhan ng peke ang totoong resulta. Ikaw na mismo ang nagsabi na ang subsequent o nahuling resulta ay siyang i-reject ng canvassing system.
Hindi na ako mag-aksaya ng panahon na ipaliwanag ang foreign access ni e360sync dahil nga nahirapan ka ngang intindihin ang simpleng transmission infrastructure, nangangahas ka pang magpaliwanag sa mas malalim pang isyu. Let your brain rest. It badly needs it. At huwag ka ng magtangkang magbakasakaling makapontos dahil sa swerte. Luck does not come in pairs.
8 taon na akong nagsusubay at masusing nag-aaral sa isyu ng dayaan. Ikaw kahapon lang. Huwag naman maging sobrang ambisyosa ang bagong silang na matsing.
Discrepancy ng resulta kamo hanap mo? Sige, for your viewing pleasure, pumunta ka sa Lunes, August 6 sa alas 10 ng umaga sa Claro M. Recto Room ng Senado sa second floor. I promise you, ipapaupo kita sa hanay ng mga resource speakers. Kakausapin ko ang Committee Secretariat. I will give you the best seat in house. Magtanong ka at gisahin mo ako total, kaalyado naman ninyo si Sen. Drilon, he can always give you his time. Let me know kung game ka. And when you are there, try your dumbest best to destroy me. I will let you eat dust, baby.
Ipinakita mo ang sulat ni Atty. George Garcia with a caption sa taas na “RESIBO.” Tagalog na yan ha, di mo pa rin gets ang kahulugan? My God, where art though in the brains of this girl? Ang ibig sabihin ng resibo ay patunay na may tinanggap ang pumirma. Si Atty. Garcia ang pumirma. So therefore, resibo niya ito, hindi akin kasi hindi naman ako pumirma dito. This is as far as logic will take us. See, you are indeed absurd!
Sa kataga namang “sent” sa nasabing sulat ni Atty. Garcia, iba ang “sent” kaysa “present.” They sent me. But was I present? Iba yung ipinadala ka. Iba naman yung nandoon ka nga. Hindi pa ninyo napatunayan na nandoon nga ako in relation to this particular letter.
As for the picture sa warehouse, hindi ako tulad sa inyo na ibinabandera ang bala bago pa man magsimula ang digmaan. Tiyak, samakalawa, pagsimula ng digmaan, talo na kayo kaagad dahil alam na ng kalaban ninyo kung anong bala meron kayo. Kabobohan!
Sa totoo lang, hindi ko nakita ang mga sulat ni Atty. George Garcia kung saan nandiyan ang pangalan ko. Pero dahil ipinakita na ninyo ito sa akin bago pa man magsimula ang bakbakan, bugbog kayo sigurado. Maraming salamat sa inyong kabobohan. It gives me superior advantage. Kaya it really pays to use one’s brains.
“Kung may history man ng pandaraya dito, hindi si VP Leni Robredo yun,” ito ang sabi mo. Narinig mo ba akong nagbanggit ng pangalan sa hearing kung sino ang nandaya? Si Comelec at Smartmatic ang target ko, hindi si Leni Robredo. Bakit ganyan ang feeling ninyo? Guilty lang ang nagrereact ng ganito dahil takot sa kanyang sariling anino.
Finally, you are sounding like the trumpet of Sixto Brillantes. Madaya ka ring bruha ka. Hindi mo ipinakita sa inyong blog na 4 lang sa 7 mga komisyoner ng Comelec ang pumirma sa pangunguna ni Andres Bautista. And as it stands now, si Abas na lang ang natira sa mga orihinal na pumirma. Anong probable cause mo gayong 1 komisyoner na lang ang natirang pumirma sa resolusyong hawak mo.
Para sa inyong kaalaman, ang testigo ni Brillantes laban sa akin ay isang swindler, estapador, palsipikador, child molester and drug peddler, all rolled into one. Sinong hukom ang maniniwala sa ganitong klaseng testigo na punulot lang ni Brillantes sa gutter.
At alam mo ba na yung testigo niya ay umamin sa akin na pinilit lang siya ni Brillantes na gumawa ng complaint-affidavit? At si Brillantes pa mismo ang sumulat ng complaint-affidavit. Pinapirma lang siya!
NOW, HERE IS THE HARD PART FOR YOU. WHAT YOU DID IS LIBELOUS. MALICE IS IMPUTED FROM THE FACT NA ITINAGO MO ANG DISPOSITIVE PORTION NG NASABING RESOLUTION KUNG SAAN MAKIKITANG 4 LANG ANG PUMIRMA HINDI 7 AT MAKIKITA ANG MGA DAHILAN NG PAGPIRMA AT HINDI PAGPIRMA NG MGA KOMISYONER NG COMELEC.
KAYA NGA HINDI UMUSAD ANG KASONG IYAN DAHIL HARASSMENT SUIT LAMANG NI BRILLANTES AT WALANG GUSTONG PUMIRMA MALIBAN NA LANG SA WALANG BAYAG NA SI ABAS.
KAPAG HINDI MO IPAKITA ANG BUONG RESOLUTION AT LINAWIN ANG ISYU, SASAMPAHAN KITA NG LIBEL DAHIL SA GINAWA MO.
(yan ang tamang spelling)
As of this writing, Chong’s post has gathered almost 17 shares, 21K reactions and thousands of comments.