"Voting Machine Funds Allegedly Funneled Into Global Bribery Scheme"

Federal prosecutors have alleged that a portion of the nearly $300 million Smartmatic received from Los Angeles County for voting machines was diverted into a slush fund used to bribe foreign officials in the Philippines and Venezuela, marking a broader pattern of alleged corruption within the company. The allegations emerged in court filings in Miami, where Smartmatic co-founder Roger Piñate and two other executives were indicted last year on charges of bribing a Philippine election official to secure a contract for the 2016 election. These claims are now being used to support a pattern of conduct by the executives accused of operating a years-long bribery and money-laundering scheme [1].

According to the court filing, the slush fund was allegedly built using a combination of inflated fees charged for voting machines in various jurisdictions, including Los Angeles County. Prosecutors have not yet indicated whether bribes were directly paid from the L.A. funds or whether they were merely stored in the same accounts as those used in other countries. The Los Angeles County contract, which was the largest of its kind in U.S. history, was awarded in 2018 after a competitive bidding process. County officials, including Registrar-Recorder Dean Logan, have consistently maintained that the contract was awarded in compliance with all public procurement standards and that the county had no knowledge of how Smartmatic used the proceeds from the contract [2].

Smartmatic has denied all allegations of wrongdoing, stating that it operates ethically and complies with all laws in every jurisdiction. The company has also contested the allegations in court, calling them “misrepresentations” and “untethered from reality.” The firm has not been charged with any criminal offense and continues to provide services under the L.A. County contract, which is set to expire in 2027 with possible extensions. However, the company’s reputation has been significantly damaged by the ongoing legal challenges and by its high-profile defamation lawsuit against Fox News [3].

The legal landscape is further complicated by Fox News’s own litigation efforts. In a separate public records lawsuit, Fox News has sought to obtain detailed records of Logan’s relationship with Smartmatic, including documentation of a high-end meal at the Magic Castle and a business-class trip to Taiwan funded by Smartmatic. The network is using these allegations to bolster its defense in its defamation case, arguing that Smartmatic’s business troubles are tied to its alleged illegal activities rather than its media coverage. The Los Angeles County office has defended Logan’s actions, stating that the trip to Taiwan was part of a required oversight visit to manufacturing facilities and not a personal favor [1].

In addition to the Los Angeles case, U.S. prosecutors have also accused Piñate of allegedly bribing Venezuela’s former election chief by gifting her a luxury home in Caracas. These allegations are part of a broader scheme that prosecutors say involved the use of shell companies and offshore bank accounts to facilitate bribes. Smartmatic has denied the allegations, stating that it ceased all operations in Venezuela in 2017 and has never attempted to return to the country. The company has also criticized Fox News for what it calls “frivolous” legal tactics aimed at further damaging its reputation [2].

The interplay between these legal cases highlights the complex dynamics in the voting technology sector, where high-stakes contracts and political influence often intersect. The Los Angeles County contract was a significant win for Smartmatic, which had struggled to gain a foothold in the U.S. market. The firm’s expansion into the U.S. began after it acquired Sequoia Voting Systems in 2006, but the move drew the attention of U.S. foreign investment authorities and led to the subsequent sale of the company. Despite its early setbacks, Smartmatic succeeded in securing major contracts in the Philippines and Venezuela before turning its attention to Los Angeles [3].

As the legal battles continue, both Smartmatic and the U.S. Department of Justice face intense scrutiny. The allegations against Smartmatic’s executives raise questions about corporate ethics in the election technology industry and the potential for foreign influence in local elections. For Los Angeles County, the case underscores the importance of transparency and oversight in public procurement, particularly when dealing with companies with complex international operations. The ongoing investigations may also have broader implications for how election technology is regulated and scrutinized across the United States.

Source: [1] Money for L.A. County voting machines ended up in bribery slush fund (https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-08-20/money-for-la-county-voting-machines-ended-up-in-bribery-slush-fund-feds-allege) [2] DoJ says voting machine maker funneled LA county money (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/aug/20/smartmatic-voting-machines-bribery) [3] Prosecutors link LA contract to Smartmatic 'slush fund (https://apnews.com/article/smartmatic-voting-fox-news-philippines-los-angeles-11f9b6163e73acec526ea3078f9b6045)