Q & A with Atty. Glenn Chong

Let’s take a look at his answers and put them alongside our questions. Let’s dissect everything one by one and tell us if he answered all the Q’s completely.

1. WAC: In your statement you mentioned meeting with Suarez sometime in April 2016 with a couple of IT experts you claim to be aligned with Duterte and Marcos. Was this the first time you met with Mr. Suarez? Who were these two IT guys? Who is this "friend" you mentioned who referred you to Mr. Suarez? And why would this "friend" refer someone like Mr. Suarez to you in the first place?

GC: Yes, it was the first time to meet him. I would need to ask permission from the IT people to disclose their identity. It was Mr. Suarez who was looking for a way to get to talk to me. I will tell the person to contact you directly.

COMMENTS: He says it's the first time he met with Suarez - Ok. No issue with that. But he's deliberately avoiding the disclosure of the identities of these 2 IT experts he brought with him to that meeting. In his original statement he mentioned a "friend" got in touch with him in behalf of Suarez. But again he's not being forthright by refusing to disclose the identity of this friend. Did he really answer this part completely and truthfully?

He is avoiding details. And the details are what's important here. He retracts and avoids mentioning Duterte and Marcos altogether.

And he didn't answer the last question. The "why." Why was this meeting set up in the first place?

For what purpose? For undercover investigation? For a sales presentation? Ok Suarez wanted to peddle him something. That was Suarez's agenda? What was his?

And this friend he refuses to mention. What's in it for him?

So let's do a scoring system. Did Atty. Chong score points here?

Are things clearer after his response?

2. WAC: You confirmed that the meeting took place in Shangri La Hotel in BGC wherein you asked Mr. Suarez for a "proof of concept" and demonstration. Why were you asking him to demonstrate? You also mentioned a couple of senators who were waiting for you to report in another building in BGC. Care to identify who these senators were? Who exactly were you representing during the meeting? You mentioned Duterte and Marcos (through the 2 IT guys), and now these two senators? Are they your clients? Under whose authority and in what capacity were you even meeting with a guy like Suarez?

GC: I asked him to demonstrate to prove that it can be done. Otherwise, if I publicly disclose anything about his scheme and it does not work, the Comelec and Smartmatic will simply laugh at me and label me a fraud. Before I speak, I have to make sure I can defend my position. To be credible, one has to have proof. I did not represent anybody in that meeting. I reported it only to Aldub to alert them of the fact that someone is peddling this cheating machine.

COMMENTS: He answered the Q directly by saying he wanted Suarez to prove it can be done.

Now he's saying that he's doing this (his agenda for meeting with Suarez) to aid his exposé.

Again he refused to identify the two senators. And why they were waiting in a different building.

This particular detail IS KEY to this whole thing.

He said he did not represent anyone.

Not Duterte. Not Marcos. Not those two senators in a nearby building. No one.

He was not lawyering for anybody. But it was possible he was brokering for someone.

He went to that meeting in his own accord. That’s what he says.

And he reported to Aldub only to make sumbong.

Which kind of negates his previous statements.

He's beginning to sound like Chiz Escudero.

He gives people the impression he's saying enough when truth is he's not saying much.

It's an exercise in oracular speech.

3. WAC: You specifically stated that Suarez brought with him an IBM ThinkPad which contained illegal copies of the Consolidation and Canvassing System (CCS). In other words, Mr. Suarez was peddling his services to you hence this demonstration? You said that upon hearing that Suarez's asking price was 200 million and upon evaluating that his "concept" was logistically problematic that you were not convinced? So Suarez WAS offering you a deal was he not? You even said that what Suarez was offering was a means to "protect" your clients from cheating which you admitted was practically a form of cheating in itself. Cheating is zero-sum Atty. Chong. One's gain is the loss of another. Which basically means that what Suarez was offering was not really protection but cheating itself. Suarez KNEW there was bound to be cheating. He had illegal copies of the CCS which can only come from Smartmatic. And he offered a demonstration on how this cheating was to be done. Would it not have been more appropriate to have Suarez arrested instead?

GC: Do not put words into my mouth. How could Suarez peddle to me when I am not a candidate. Only a candidate can be interested to cheat. I am not representing any client. My interest is to expose it. And I am working hard to make sure that the public forum in which to disclose it materializes now. The only forum in which all these could be exposed is the Joint Congressional Oversight Committee (JCOC) hearing which the law mandates to be conducted 12 months after the elections but which until now has not been convened.

At that time, I see no need to arrest him because I intended to present him as a witness instead at the JCOC.

COMMENTS: Dito sya naipit.

Too many contradictions with previous statements.

Pero heto ang pinakamalaking tanong.

He says his agenda for meeting Suarez is to expose it. He says he was not representing anyone.

Wala syang dalang kandidato.

So he wasn't brokering.

But what was Suarez's intent in meeting with Chong? If not to peddle his wares?

Why would Suarez ask P200 million from him?

If Suarez knows that Chong is not representing a client.

Kung ikaw ba si Suarez itutuloy mo pa yung meeting with Chong kung alam mong tinitiktikan ka lang nya?

Hihingi ka ba ng 200 million sa taong alam mong wala namang interes bumili ng serbisyo mo at lalo na alam mong wala namang pera?

Chong is sticking to his alibi. He was there to listen to Suarez so he can expose the workings of the syndicate.

Okay at surface level it sounds justifiable.

He even hints that the only forum - JCOC - has not yet been convened till now.

So ano nagiipon sya ng ebidensya?

And he even said he did not have Suarez arrested because he wanted to present him as a witness.

But Suarez was asking for money.

For what? To cheat? To be a witness? His statements just don’t add up. Alam ba ni Suarez ang tinatayuan ni Chong nung nagusap sila?

At yung dalawang senador? Nagiimbistiga din?

Bakit iniiwas ni Chong ang usapan dun sa 2 senador?

If they were investigating, dapat sinabi nya na malinaw yun.

“I was sent there by two senators because we were all investigating.”

It was obvious Suarez was peddling because this meeting happened BEFORE the election.

How can you act as witness for something that has not yet taken place?

Bakit nya pinaligtas kamo si Suarez? Dahil hindi sya kumbinsido at walang kwenta yung demo nya?

O hinintay nyang makapagdaya muna sa election para magamit nya itong witness?

Despite Chong's circumventions, this alternate angle is beginning to sound plausible: Suarez met with Chong to broker a deal with those 2 senators.

Those 2 IT experts could have been sent there by those senators. Not by Duterte or Marcos.

To check kung credible nga ang sinasabi ni Suarez.

Para kang bibili ng second hand na sasakyan na may kasama kang mekaniko pagtingin mo.

So ginisa nila si Suarez. Tanong tanong pano ito pano yun.

Then Suarez asks for 200 million.

100 mil for each senator.

Chong reports it to the 2 senators.

Dito papasok yung testimony ni Jason. Where he tells us he saw Glenn Chong in that warehouse in Mandaluyong where the COMELEC bidding took place. What was Glenn Chong doing there?

And why did he not mention it in his statement?

4. WAC: You mentioned that people like Suarez were "independent contractors" who offered "protection" while the COMELEC-Smartmatic Syndicate had their own "authorized dealers" who officially handled the cheating. But Suarez did work for Smartmatic-TIM. And that copy of the CCS he brought with him could not have come from anywhere else but from Smartmatic itself. Which only means one thing. Despite claims on the contrary, logic and evidence dictates that Suarez IS an authorized dealer of Smartmatic and not an independent operator. How could he have access to the CCS and the entire system if he wasn't representing the Smartmatic syndicate?

GC: To my mind, he was operating independently of the syndicate. If he were authorized, he would not have to go through such complicated ways to make his system work. He mentioned reverse engineering to explain his illegal copy of the CCS.

COMMENTS: This part confirms Suarez's agenda in meeting with him.

He never mentioned that Suarez met him offering to stand as witness or asset or mole. Suarez was offering to cheat.

Kaso Chong made it appear as if Suarez was offering a means to protect.

Hence the delineation between an authorized dealer and an independent contractor.

According to him, an authorized dealer is there to “sell the cheating” while an independent contractor like Suarez “peddled protection.”

Pero pareho din lang pandaraya.

Again back to the big Q.

Why would Suarez even bother meeting with Chong if Suarez knew Chong was not brokering for anyone?

Or Suarez knew Chong had no money?

Chong inserted a disclaimer here - TO MY MIND. So he was stating an opinion. Or a speculation. He had no definitive proof to state that Suarez was an independent player.

Reverse engineering?

How the fuck can an outsider do that?

Chong is introducing technical concepts now to muddle the issue.

If you can’t answer straight, guluhin mo. Typical lawyer tactics.

Always finding ways to complicate things.

I remember something that Jason told us. Na ginugulo sadya ng Smartmatic at LP ang sitwasyon. It is possible that all these previous exposés about electoral fraud are just a smokescreen. To disguise the true mechanics of the cheating.

5. WAC: You also mentioned that when COMELEC-Smartmatic got wind of 'independent contractors' like Suarez they decided to replace 100 CCS operators nationwide three days before election day. Is this even logistically possible? Were there trained alternate operators waiting on standby? Is this part of their protocol? Can COMELEC simply do this 3 days prior to election day? And why is it that no one reacted? Not even yourself? Except for Senator Grace Poe as you originally mentioned. Please do enlighten us.

GC: I was informed about the reaction of Sen. Grace Poe only on election day. That was the only time I got wind of it. With Comelec, anything is possible. I provided a link to the report on the reaction of Poe in the first answer I posted in your page/timeline.

COMMENTS: Again skirting the issue. One blanket statement - With COMELEC, anything is possible. Ano ito? Slogan ng banko? We find ways?

Either he didn't get the question or he was deliberately skirting it.

I wasn’t asking about COMELEC's capability.

I was asking is that even legal? Is such a thing even allowed by law?

Can Comelec change people at the last hour? Was this part of protocol?

May nagpalit walang nakaalam? At walang nakapagreklamo?

6. WAC: Following your narrative, after the elections you claim to have had another meeting with Suarez in a mall near BBM's headquarters along EDSA. Which mall was this? There are around 3 along that area. You claim you were supposed to meet with a "witness" who in your surprise turned out to be Suarez again. Who arranged for this second meeting? How many times did you meet with him? Was this the second, third or fourth one? Please clarify. And who exactly were you representing this time? Is it Mr. Marcos? Are you officially lawyering for Mr. Marcos? Those two senators which you have yet to name? Why does Suarez keep targeting you? First as a contractor, now as a witness? And you claim Suarez showed you proof of how cheating was done in his home turf in Quezon Province (Suarez's uncle is Congressman in Quezon while his cousin is Governor there) with no affidavits and witnesses aside from another woman who also claims to be a CCS operator herself? And Suarez according to your statement was asking for Php 50 million this time in exchange for his witness testimony? And that you ignored him after concluding it was a waste of time?

GC: Robinson’s Pioneer. I was asked by a former congressman to meet up this guy and see if the evidence he has is credible. I met him a couple of times. That was the last time I met him, May 2016. I am not lawyering for BBM. As I have said, I act for myself and on my own behalf. As for the two senators, I have no authority yet to disclose their names.

As for being a contractor, he got to me via some friends. As for being a witness, he contacted someone else who happen to know me and asked me to go and see him. Suarez did not specifically target me posing himself as a witness.

Yes, I ignored him afterwards because he virtually had nothing to prove as a witness.

COMMENTS: My hunch was right. They met at Robinson's Forum in Pioneer. BBM's HQ is directly across that.

Meron na naman syang binanggit na former congressman daw.

Bakit hindi nya pangalanan para maliwanag lahat?

Is this the same guy who linked Suarez to him noong unang meeting? O ibang tao na naman?

What was the intent of this former congressman?

To expose the Syndicate by using Suarez?

According to Chong, he met with Suarez twice.

The first one in April before the elections in Shangri La BGC.

The second and last one in Robinson’s Pioneer in May after the elections. Says he is not lawyering for BBM.

But what was he doing in BBM's headquarters then?

"As for being a contractor, he got to me via some friends. As for being a witness, he contacted someone else who happen to know me and asked me to go and see him. Suarez did not specifically target me posing himself as a witness."

Now this statement is gold.

Here he admits Suarez met him the first time as a contractor.

Again he mentions some "friends" but refuses to name them.

Chong is digging himself a deeper hole.

His casual statements when dissected carefully dun sya napapahamak.

Then he says the second time Suarez met with him. Suarez was now posing as a witness.

Suarez was not specifically targeting home posing as a witness - so who was Suarez targeting this time?

BBM? Because BBM did not avail of the services and lost?

Because Suarez had the impression that BBM had money?

Now let's dissect this further.

If BBM was involved and Chong was his broker, why did he lose?

And who was on the opposite end? Was it Suarez or another group from Smartmatic?

BBM could not have been involved here. Even Jason said so.

7. There is no Question No. 7.

8. WAC: If Suarez already did a presentation earlier, you already knew there was bound to be cheating. Why was there no report made to the authorities? The cheating could have been prevented if you exposed Suarez in time. We are seriously grappling with your statements here Atty. Chong. We're trying to make sense of statements and details which do not seem to add up.

GC: Plain and simple, Dr. Watson. His system is not functional. Why would I shout to the highest heavens pointing to him as a cheat when in fact his system cannot be reasonably guaranteed to work since he needs the cooperation of so many people not under his control. If I did just as you wanted me to, I would look dumb and fool if it is proven that it will not work. Doing just exactly as you wanted to will simply bolster the arguments of the syndicate that we are simply making up stories about cheating. You will play right into their hands.

In this case, the cheating was perpetrated by the syndicate hacking the system from inside using their own passwords and authorization protocols. There is no way to stop the cheating if perpetrated this way.

COMMENTS: This is the funniest so far. Pagkatapos niyang sabihing independent operator si Suarez selling protection against cheating - now he's saying his system doesn't work. Saying it's logistically taxing.

But then again he could be saying this to bolster his alibi that he did not cut a deal with Suarez.

Even his claim that Suarez is an independent contractor instead of an authorized dealer is now in contention.

But what if Suarez was an authorized dealer?

All evidence points to him being one.

First you have Suarez's own FB profile where he openly brandishes having worked for Smartmatic.

Then u have the CCS which can only come from Smartmatic.

Then we have the complete intel on Suarez’s background from other sources.

Then we have Jason’s testimony.

Suarez working for SMARTMATIC establishes one fact: He is capable of what he's offering since he would have access and control over these CCS operators that Atty. Chong was mentioning.

Chong's claim that Suarez reversed engineered the CCS is complete BS.

How is that even possible for an outsider to do that?

So his statements here are worthless if it is proven later that Suarez indeed worked for Smartmatic and acted as an authorized dealer.

And that he cut a deal with Suarez.

He says there was no way to stop or prevent the cheating?

If he exposed that operators were peddling right and left THAT could have alerted everyone. And the election could have been put on hold.

People making demonstrations with the CCS prior to the election IS ENOUGH to alert everyone hindi ba?

Bakit mo hihintayin na makapangdaya pa?

Alam mo nang may dayaang mangyayari dahil may mga naglalako na nga at pruweba nun may mga hawak pang CCS.

9. WAC: If you knew that Suarez was involved, and he was even busy extorting you for money, why did you not have him arrested the second time? Why in God's name did you let him go? The illegal copies of the CCS he had with him would have been enough proof to establish Suarez's complicity. He could have been entrapped during that 'demonstration.'

GC: I did not have him arrested because to my mind, he was not extorting me money. He was trying all his dumbest best to convince me but I know better. At that point, during the second and third meetings, he was not committing a crime.

COMMENTS: Now this part is funny.

How can he not think that Suarez is not extorting him money when he specifically mentioned that Suarez was asking for 50 million?

What was that for?

For the pleasure of having dinner with him?

Suarez was trying to con him but he said he didn’t budge.

Then comes another bombshell.

Kanina he says he met with Suarez only twice.

Suarez said in his convo that he met with Chong thrice.

In this statement Chong says: At that point, during the second and third meetings, he was not committing a crime.

So there was a third meeting!

Chong himself said so.

Atty. Glenn Chong won't stand a proper cross-examination in the witness stand.

And how can he not think that what Suarez was doing was not already criminal?

Extortion is a crime.

So is offering to cheat.

I even made an analogy to one of Chong's followers in the comment's thread.

I said Suarez peddling his services is no different from a budol budol guy attempting to sell a fake device or gadget.

Dun pa lang mismo pwede mo na ipahuli yung tao.

10. WAC: Juan Miguel Suarez III tells a different version in his convo with our source. He claims it was you who approached him through a "third party." And that after your "third" meeting, he was pursued in Naga which resulted in the alleged "deaths" of two of his companions. Whether or not there is truth to any of these claims can easily be established in a later investigation. Deaths and disappearances can be verified and fact-checked. You claim however to have no knowledge of these allegations and even dismissed Suarez's claims as a "tall-tale" and as a "bargaining chip" to boost his market value as he was allegedly extorting you for money. We all know that Suarez is an extortionist. He even swindles his own friends and relatives. But why did he singularly mention you several times in that convo? What could be the real nature of your relationship and involvement with Mr. Suarez?

GC: By this time, you would have known who Suarez is, enough to spot that which is false. I never knew him from Adam. I never initiated contact with him. If he mentioned me several times, it is probably his pent up anger at not being able to make money from or using me especially at the critical time he expected to make money. He probably thought I was his key to making money during the elections. I made sure he did not have. If he is using my name to make money, then I will go after him in the proper courts this time.

COMMENTS: Again Chong got this one all wrong.

He is saying that Suarez had an axe to grind and that could have been the reason why Suarez kept mentioning him in the convo.

But Suarez's and John's convo was last April pa.

And Suarez was talking to a fellow insider. A fellow PCOS operator.

Suarez never expected that his private convo will find its way out in the open.

He never would have thought it would leak.

Suarez had no motive to implicate Chong in his convo with Jason.

It was a casual talk. He was talking to a fellow insider.

Buti man lang sana kung si Suarez tayo ang kausap maaari pang banggitin nya si Chong nang sadya.

But the circumstances surrounding that convo with Jason were totally different.

It was spontaneous not contrived.

But Chong stands firm in denying any relationship with Suarez.

11. WAC: You claim that there are two sides competing with each other when it comes to rigging votes: the independent contractors like Suarez and the authorized dealers of Smartmatic itself. What proof can you offer that they are competing with each other rather than belonging to a single entity? You mentioned some are even PPCRV volunteers who brought with them actual PCOS machines during their client demonstrations. Where would these actual machines come from if not from COMELEC-Smartmatic itself? You likewise mentioned that the Syndicate refused to go after these independent contractors because doing so will compromise their own authorized dealers. This just doesn't add up. Unless they all belong to one organization and the alleged "competition" between two separate groups is a mere ploy. A setup to justify why some clients ended up losing despite paying money to the syndicate. If the client wins, thanks to the authorized dealers. If the client loses, they'll blame the so-called independent contractors who happen to be their assets just the same. Is this the setup and strategy you described as "good business sense" coming from the syndicate?

GC: You have a point. It is possible that the syndicate accepts money from both sides using different groups. But I still believe the independent contractors and the syndicate do not work together based on my interviews from candidates who paid and won and candidates who paid but lost. As a matter of fact, at the JCOC hearing, if and when it is called, I intend to present a witness who videotaped another independent operator selling a different type of cheating, different from that of Suarez.

COMMENTS: Chong basically affirmed what we said. The modus of the syndicate is clear. One group will act as Independent Contractor, another as Authorized Dealer. Pagnanalo, salamat at galing sa Authorized Dealer yun. Pagnatalo dahil may mas mataas na nagbayad kahit nagbitiw narin ng pera si kandidato isisisi sa Independent Contractor. But both groups sa kanila galing. Saan kukuha ng technical knowhow itong si Independent Contractor at kopya ng CCS kundi sa kanila? Pwede nga naming hiwalay ang diskarte. Pero iisa ang nagpapatakbo. Yung sindikato pa rin.

Now when it comes to this JCOC hearing, wala kaming tiwala dito. Bakit? E malamang hawak din nila yan. He says it’s the proper forum, but why trust a forum that could possibly be contaminated? Walang pinagkaiba sa Ombudsman yan. Sa kaso ni Leni, the Ombudsman would be the proper forum dahil saklaw nya lahat na public officials. Pero bakit pa tayo lalapit dun gayung alam natin na kakampi ni Lugaw si Conchita? At binigyan pa ng Ramon Magsaysay Award nung parehong grupo na sobrang panatiko kay Jess?

We have another set of questions for Atty. Glenn Chong but he didn’t answer them. And it is clear from his responses here that we are not getting any closer to the truth. Are we singling him out here? No. COMELEC-Smartmatic pa rin ang target natin. At lahat ng naging kliyente nila, lahat na operator, broker at protector. Lahat na kumita at nanginabang sa pandaraya. For all we care, Atty Glenn Chong is just a side issue. It is just unfortunate that he found himself implicated by two ACTUAL operators. Should we exonerate him? Tama ba na hayaan na lang natin sya at hindi natin sya busisiin? You tell us.