I find this conversation fascinating because in a few days we will begin to see who is bullshiting and stonewalling, and what is the real story.

But the PREP results are not the official results. The official results can only come in an "acta" or act signed by the elections officials in each polling place, who are chosen by lottery from the citizenry, much like, say, a jury pool. It is a crime to tamper with an "acta." No legal punishment exists for sending in a false PREP report.

For example, in "casilla 1019 Contigua 3 del Estado de México" (polling place #1019 of the State of Mexico), the PREP reports 88 votes for López Obrador, 62 for Calderon, 41 for Madrazo, 21 for Mercado, 4 for Campa, 8 for write-in candidates, and 7 ballots annulled ("hanging chad" type scenario on those: Let's see if IFE allows those to be reviewed in the official count).

You are supposed to be able to verify that at the IFE website, district by district. But the Internet access to the IFE system has been crashing constantly ever since last night.

Fortunately, when it has been up, El Universal has been downloading the results and putting them on its own website at this URL:

However, a photograph of the ACTA reveals that Lopez Obrador received 188 votes there - a disappearance of 100 in a single polling place where about 320 votes were cast.

More common proofs are emerging of "shavings" of votes: six here, two there, the majority - coincidentally? - shaved from Lopez Obrador's tallies.

There are also documents surging that show that more votes were counted than voters who cast votes in many districts.

Now, I call this the PREF or "Preliminary Results of Election Fraud" because when I finish reporting this story you will see the evidence, photos and all. Until then it is "preliminary" report I'm sharing here. We have various days still to complete the official report. But I think my preliminary fraud results count as much as IFE's preliminary "election" results and my credibility towers over that of the nine political appointees to the IFE board and their staff member, Luis Carlos Ugalde. That's not saying much, for reasons that I will also shortly be reporting about his and IFE's behavior this week.

By IFE's own numbers, the difference between the two candidates nationwide hovers slightly below or above one percent, a difference of less than 377,000 votes.

Also by IFE's numbers there are more than 827,000 nullified votes. Let's find out why in the coming days.

Out of 130,000 "actas" the difference is an average of less than 3 votes (really, potentially less than two, since if a vote shifts from one to another it changes the margin by two).

Now, what about Jules' presumption that IFE is honest and of good faith?

Here are some facts: