“They have no votes” is a sentence that became viral after it became known about the announcement of the Civil Revolution movement, in which it is requested or demanded that the President of the Republic dissolves the Assembly and calls for elections. There were enough reasons for such thinking, because if they were sure they had enough votes, they should wait only a few weeks for the presidential term to end. But there is room for at least two other interpretations that are not mutually exclusive.

The first derives from the same statement, in the part in which the vice president is alluded to, because it shows that the goal is to overthrow the government, not to sanction the president for embezzlement, which is the only reason accepted by the Constitutional Court. They believe that the conditions in the country would not improve if the Deputy Prime Minister was released. In other words, they understand that the successor appointed by the constitution will maintain the orientation established by Guillermo Lasso (by the way, it must be said that it is surprising that these people expected Borrero to do what they described as treason when Lenin did it) Moreno regarding with your boss). The fact that they just came to that conclusion cannot be understood as a sign of ingenuity, but as a reaction to the evidence that with the vice president they will not achieve impunity for their leader, which is a priority and immediate goal. For this reason, the latter had already ruled in this sense a few days before, so the announcement is only an expression of the obedient and thoughtless behavior of its members. That line of action was formalized there, and will undoubtedly continue regardless of the outcome of the impeachment trial. With or without impeachment votes, the actions will continue until the government is overthrown.

Another interpretation is that these castle statements were put to the Government and undecided parliamentarians. The effect of installing the idea that there are no votes for removal would be, on the one hand, for the Government to give in or abandon its actions aimed at reaching management agreements with some benches. On the other hand, I would encourage the MPs to vote for the impeachment in two ways. Some would do it to ensure that outcome and be part of the winning side. Others, on the contrary, would assume that, if there are no necessary votes anyway, they can support the impeachment, which will not happen, and keep their place in the Assembly away from the Government. It is convenient to present the image of radical opponents to both. These are the receptive ears to which the false signal contained in the statement is directed.

False signals are old tricks of politics and war. Publishing or implying some fact or action in order to provoke an unexpected reaction or create confusion is a well-known maneuver in these areas. It is no coincidence that it is used in an environment where politics has a lot to do with war and where the goal is to eliminate the enemy. Whether it succeeds or not depends on the recipient’s ability to untangle the message. (OR)