The game begins with each player holding a speech about why he should be the president (or just say "pass" if not interested in the position). After this players cast their votes on themselves or another player. Once a president has been elected this player distributes the various cabinet positions (security minister, 3 army generals, 1 air force general and 1 navy general). The president position being the weakest in terms of military power must rely on other players to remain in control - thus you have to balance your own swindling of money with keeping everyone else (or at least the majority) happy.
The president is given an annual budget which he distributes to each player, the players then vote if they want to pass the budget - or call for a new election. If the budget is passed the player may attempt to bring their money to the bank and deposit it in Swiss bank accounts where the money will be safe, attempt to assassinate someone, or start an uprising/rebellion against the president.
Assassination attempts are tricky because you have to guess the location of each player (which is picked at the start of each turn). If you pick the correct location you often also have to roll a D6 to succeed at a specific result.
Igniting a rebellion is also a bit risky; a lone general is never going to topple the president. On the other hand a successful rebellion will grant the rebels the choice of picking their own new president - and kill a player from the opposition.
And around it goes; it's a pretty chaotic game - which can grow tedious if everything bogs down with elections and re-elections each turn. It can probably be a fun game if you are into this type of genre and play with the right people. Our session felt like it would never end, and I personally felt how my enthusiasm dropped after about 2 hours because of the way the game is built. You are very reliant on the cards you draw from the deck - without voters you can't influence anything, and without any other good event or assassin cards you can't do anything really. So for about 1.5 hour I felt extremely passive as all cards I was drawing from the deck were useless and didn't help me out in any way.
But perhaps the main problem with Junta, as I see it, is the player requirement. You need so many people to play this game it's ridiculous. While most games work fine with 3-5 players most of my boardgame sessions involve 3-4 people. It's hard to attract beyond 5 players at my club. So the need for 7 or so players really creates a difficult obstacle for those that actually love the game and would like to play it often.
My score for this game: 6/10.