The true winner of the impeachment trial is JPE

With great power comes great responsibility, says the Spiderman movie. 

The true winner of the impeachment trial may just be Enrile and I am hoping he decides to use this new found political capital to good use, that is, for the genuine good of the country and not, once again, to fuel  new political machinations that he can now participate in, now that he has this new lease on life c/o stem cells. 

There is no doubt that he has the intelligence, the skills, the talents, and the capabilities to strategically turn it all around. Hey, at 88, he is still here. He was a bastard from the province and, now in his old age, he is still the senate president. He has gone through all these regimes, from Marcos’ martial law to Edsa 1 to the coups to Ramos’ time to Erap to GMA and to, the current, Pnoy term. There is no doubt that he has the ability, the guts and the will to stick around. 

Enrile has had a very colorful public life and I remain skeptical of what he will do next. All his past behavior, at least for me, will not be erased just because he performed very well and was so entertaining in the  impeachment trial.

Maybe he is just one of the winners but he is someone up there in the list of the top winners of the trial.  

The way he pandered the masses with his ridiculous (but sadly effective) “gusto ko happy ka” ads still makes me worry a lot about his character, even in his old age. 

Let's hope that he really is thinking of his historical legacy and does well by the country.     

My Answers and Arguments to it all

It surprises me how I've become this person, who believes in thing thing called ethics and these weird morals.  How is it that I have become this person who actually wants to give the very small doses of hope that the recent changes in the government has brought about the benefit of the doubt? 

Maybe I've elevated myself to some new ethical level? Or maybe, most of the people I know have become more cynical. Hey, I used to be the jaded one. I used to be the cynic in most relationships that I know of. What has happened to me? 

Throughout the Corona trial various arguments from various people with opposing views have come up and I would just like to put my answers out there, whether or not they will ever see my point or agree with me.

So, here are some of the arguments I've heard and what I think about them: 

Carpio vs. Corona, and the idea of replacing a bad man with a worse man

As I told a friend of mine, I’ve taken Carpio out of the equation with regards to the trial. 

Maybe if Carpio became GMA’s appointed one, and not Corona, he would have done more of her dirty work and he would have been the one in this situation, I acknowledge that. 

But that’s the thing, he ended up not getting chosen, and he ended up probably getting bitter and mad about it like everyone says, but then, if he becomes the next justice, then he ended getting lucky, he would be given a chance to play the hero. 

If he is given this chance, I would assume that he would actually be committed to the cause for a while, and really, why would he pass up the chance to look good like this? If given a chance to turn his image around, wouldn't he at least try he play his role well? 

Well, who knows, after all, didn't this happen before, to GMA? She was handed a chance to play the role of a hero after Edsa 2, after the people turned on Erap, but she fell so short and she was actually worse than Erap. 

That’s the thing, we replace a bad person with another person, hoping that the replacement would do better. We hope that this new person would do things right and we try to have faith that this new person would uplift the situation. As isn’t it at the core of the desire for change is the desire for things to improve. Otherwise, why do we even bother? 

But, hey, nothing is for certain. We do our best and hope for the best. Sometimes they turn out right, sometimes they turn out wrong. 

But if we don’t make a change, just because we say that the alternative could be worse, such as the case for insisting to keep Corona because Carpio might be worse, then it is also equivalent to saying that we are willing to accept the status quo and accept no change. Worse, we’ve let the abstract possibility of a worse situation to hold us back and to just accept an ongoing concretely bad situation. 

Everybody is doing it – part of the Miriam argument

If you get caught doing something wrong and you use this as an excuse, well it’s not an excuse. 

As the saying goes: just because everyone is doing it, doesn't make it right. It just makes you the unfortunate fellow who got caught in the act with his hand in the cookie jar or some crumbs trailing you around (as the case may be here). 

And, if the people who prosecuted you or turned you in have some skeletons in their closet too, well, then they are hypocrites but that still doesn’t make you a saint. You are still guilty. 

Politics, Not the Law

“Napupulitika lang”. This is just politics and not just about the law or so they say. So what then? Do we really expect that politics won’t be involved? This is the impeachment of a chief justice who’s a notable ally of GMA, it’s televised for the whole country to see – What?! You think there’s no politics? 

But even if it’s about politics as well as about the law, what does it really change? This person should still be held accountable and not be let off just because it involves politics.  

It is a witch-hunt, it's bullying (Corona)

Everyone knew that he was an ally of GMA and that he was doing her work. The prosecution knew he had things to hide, even if they were not as prepared. 

As mentioned, the goal was to hold the GMA administration and Corona, a GMA appointee, was blocking this goal. 

Even if there was a witch hunt, if nothing could be found, then nothing will be found. And, Corona as a grown man, complete with his crude language and threats, and his top position of a branch of a government branch, does he look like someone who can actually be bullied? His “kawawa” looks doesn't fool me. I can’t say that it fooled a lot of people either.   

Improper filing SALN, a minor fault not worthy of being impeached 

It’s just the wrong declaration - BUT he is the Chief Justice, but it is no small amount. 

Some said that by virtue of lawyering technicalities, they side with the defense since the process was haphazardly done and the prosecution was very sloppy. 

Never mind that anonymous or not, what the “sources” revealed proved to be more right than wrong. The bank account numbers were correct, USD accounts existed, undeclared properties existed, etc. – he had admitted to having $2.4M and P80M vs. his P3M+ declaration. And, this is the truth (or part of the truth, who knows if he has more hidden wealth -it’s probable). 

I remember from Pia Cayatano’s explanation of her vote that she said that while the issue was just an improper filing of the SALN, we are not talking of a minor error. It’s not a case of a few pesos or say, just a parking lot space of a condo unit that was inadvertently forgotten.  It was a case of only filing about 2% of his entire revealed cash levels and that's not minor at all. 

To acquit him based on lame reasoning like – hey, it’s good faith because his interpretation of the SALN is that he doesn’t need to report his USD because of the secrecy law and hey, his other funds are co-mingled – simply isn’t be acceptable. 

Got curious, so looked for a screenshot of that famous PowerPoint from the ombudsman 

Even if it was simply an improper filing of SALN, it is impossible to look at it as simply that. 

In the end, the public had seen a glimpse of the discrepancy and how glaring it really was and more significantly, the public had witnessed the behavior, strategy and character of Corona and his camp.  

Truly, more than the technicalities, it was how he performed and how he put himself out there that made it impossible for him to win. 

It was how he tried to cover up his sins, how he accused and threatened everyone, how he used crude language, how he behaved, how he walked out, how he pretended to be hospitalized and how he defended himself with the infamous “palusots” that made him lose the game. 

Prosecution was so sloppy and so weak

Yes, they were very sloppy. I wished they performed better. I hoped they were more prepared. But they didn't give a stellar performance and they weren't really that prepared. 

But this doesn’t change the fact that Corona is GMA’s man and if he remains in position the goal of making her liable will never happen. Their incompetence also doesn’t change the fact that Corona did not file his SALN correctly and only reported about 2% of his total revealed funds.

At the end of the day, despite the prosecution’s incompetence and despite the defense’s top quality team that included the infamous Cuevas, Corona’s true colors still shown through.  The defense team’s brilliance was not enough to win it for him. And, in spite of the prosecution’s poor performance, they won. 

In the end, the defense put the ombudsman and Corona on the stand. Both moves just won the case for the prosecution. And, Corona was his own worse witness. 

So, in spite of the prosecution’s poor performance, they inevitably won. All in all, the win should not be attributed to the prosecution's prowess (because they had almost none). The situation was just a testament to how very little the Corona side had to work on after all. Ultimately, Corona's top notch team could only come up with palusot reasons and had been reduced to pulling various stunts and maneuvers to shift the attention from the real issues so hey, their case was also somewhat weak as well. 

Constitutional Crisis 

Constitutional Crisis – the catch phrase that the judiciary lets out every time it thinks it’s being conquered by the executive branch.  If the judicial branch were playing nice to begin with and at the very least was being mildly cooperative, there wouldn't have been a need to deal with them in the first place. 

They are saying with this phrase that they will not back off, so you (executive) back off, otherwise there will be a constitutional crisis. But it goes both ways, if the judiciary “backs off” – i.e. cooperates, then there wouldn't be a need for any of it, there wouldn’t be a threat called constitutional crisis. 

The point is, it is not just the executive branch that’s triggering a constitutional crisis if there was to be such as thing, the judiciary is equally responsible for it. So, this whole thing about the judiciary accusing the executive of this thing and threatening everyone that there will be this constitutional crisis is part gaslight-ing and part thug-gery as well. 

And hey, good thing JPE finally said it in this interview that I saw on ANC, that if the judiciary insists on not abiding by the Senate’s impeachment of Corona then they will stand up and fight them. Great.   

This is a dictatorship, is this martial law?

Dictatorship, martial law – words that have been uttered in an accusatory manner by Corona, his wife and I think, was it Mike Arroyo? Or was it Iggy? (It was one of them)  

Well, to call Pnoy’s term akin to a martial law is largely ridiculous. First off, he was voted legitimately by the people. 

Next, the platform of his campaign is anti-corruption and is about holding GMA liable for her sins, her corruption.  

As everyone one already knows, before GMA left office she strategically situated her people in various government positions, including the controversial SC chief justice position (during the ban) to ensure that when she is out of office it will take the next president a tremendous amount of effort to hold her accountable for anything. And, just to seal the deal, she ran for congress as well. Never mind that it is unconventional and just desperate to go from president to congresswoman. 

So, you know, Pnoy’s quest to get her people out and get his people in has more to do with cleaning house than any plans for a dictatorial rule.

Add to this, any quest for change would need the involvement of all the branches of government. If all branches of government are at odds with each other, then nothing will move forward. All is well and good if GMA controlled segments would miraculously cooperate with the current administration but this will obviously not happen. There is no other choice but to get her people out and get his people in for any changes to happen. 

We don’t really want a government that has been made impotent by the last regime’s clever schemes. So, here’s to hoping that the current government’s good intentions will soon be enforceable after they've done enough cleaning. 

Moreover, other factions, not only GMA’s, are likewise threatened of the growing control of Pnoy over the government. To accuse the current government of a dictatorship because of this reason is rooted in politics and self-interest as well. 

As I always say, in group projects and in most anything else, I don’t mind following a leader and having this person in control of the situation if this leader is doing things right (and in this case, is standing for and is trying to clean up the government).  

I am thinking here as a mere citizen and, perhaps, this is my self-interest. 

I am not a politician who has to think about my shrinking place in the political scene so I do not mind this alleged control, if at the end of the day, it will lead us all to a better place. 

I want to be hopeful. I am, of course, still very skeptical but I welcome this shred of hope over having no sign of it at all, which was the case in GMA's time. 

I am not expecting anything miraculous, just a slight move forward. 

Coronanovella: The Season Finale / The Results Show

Predictions 

There had been much speculation as to who will vote for whom, or for a conviction or an acquittal. For a period of time, I keep hearing about 6 uncertain senators. 

I have also heard people saying that it would likely be an acquittal since only 8 was needed to acquit and 16 was needed to convict, the odds are against it they said. Someone I know, who is a top bank executive, said that everyone around (him/her) kept saying that it would be an acquittal. 

Yesterday, my brother and I were discussing how we thought each senator was going to vote. We thought 7 would likely acquit Corona: Miriam, Arroyo, Bong Bong, Bong Revilla, Lito Lapid, Villar and Loren – based on the senators court behavior and affiliation to GMA. We thought that the 6 uncertain senators were: Chiz, Sotto, Honasan, Estrada, Enrile, and Pimentel. And, the remaining senators, we thought of would be voting for a conviction – also based on their court behavior as well as their alliance to Pnoy. 

While I wasn’t as confident with my prediction, I was thinking that Corona would be impeached based on:

1. Some of the senators are reelectionists (and would likely vote based on public opinion)
2. Corona’s guilty looking behavior (walked out, hospitalization and admittance of $2.4M and P80M)
3. Farinas’ closing argument, which perfectly encapsulated the points of the prosecution, poked holes in Corona’s flimsy explanations and superbly conveyed all of it in straightforward Tagalog (none of those forced trying-to-be-deep-Tagalog diatribes from people who were never really comfortable in the language to begin with). After that closing by Farinas, I don’t know how any reelectionist could risk looking like a tool, voting to acquit when it’s so clear that Corona had all these unexplained wealth that he really could only explain through his “palusots”. 

I am glad to know that I am, after all, a better political analyst than those bank executives (or maybe, I just got lucky, who knows?). 

Surprising Landslide

I had thought that maybe the undecided senators would be divided for the prosecution and the defense or that the votes would be close, or that there would be some suspense like how it happens in your average reality TV show, but apparently, after all the ruckus, the result was a landslide for conviction. 

Monday night some analyst were saying that things could be a "19 vs. 4" scenario, with some analysts identifying Bong Revilla and Lito Lapid as swing votes.  This was the first time I’ve heard that these Lakas-Kampi boys would go against GMA’s Corona. 

Those who voted to acquit, Miriam, Bong Bong and Arroyo, are not reelectionist and have no need to heed public opinion.

All I can say for Miriam, she can be entertaining but on some occasions her exploding voice can be quite irritating. I felt like doing an Aguirre while watching her (more than) 2 minute explanation.  There is no doubt about her talent as a lawyer and as a judge. The problem lies when it’s obvious that she’s operating under an obvious bias. I don’t know how she can excuse her behavior and coat it under the guise of technicalities of the law that she says she is an expert of since she has been an ROTC judge. 

As for Bong Revilla, anytime he opens his mouth, I just feel an overwhelming sense of annoyance. He has never endeared himself to me, not when he was roasting Hayden on those leaked videos, (No, I don’t like Hayden but I also don’t think the videos merited that much senate attention. He doesn't even know how to pick a decent issue on which to grandstand on) and not on this trial. In addition, every time he opens his mouth, I am not convinced of any impressive level of intelligence. All I can sense is his ability to half-act things. He expressed his hardship today in his explaination, he says "napakahirap" with regards to his vote but that “alang alang sa pagkakaisa at paghilom ng ating bayan”, he votes to convict. What does that even mean? What a lame attempt to use Tagalog to make his decision sound substantial and deep. All he said was that he had a hard time but will vote to convict for the sake of the country’s unity and healing. So, is he saying that he wanted to vote otherwise but only voted to convict for the sake of the country’s unity and healing? Does that even make sense, really? So, you want to acquit a Supreme Court justice who didn't file $2.4M and P80M in his SALN because that's what you really wanted to do, and you are having such a hard time, but you will convict him instead just for the sake of the nation? Say, what?!

Lito Lapid, meanwhile was just hilarious. I don’t know if that was his insecurity talking or if it was some clever ploy to endear himself to the masses or maybe it was both. He emphasized his inability to understand English, his high school diploma and his inability to understand the law. Yet, he says he was to judge a man like Corona, who is more educated than him. Hmm, I don’t know about you but he just mentioned all the reasons why he was incapable of judging the case or any case for that matter. If he couldn't understand English, how could he have understood half of what was being said in the trial? And, if he didn’t know anything about the law, how could he have understood the merits of both the prosecution and the defense? For that matter, how could he even do his job as a senator, if he doesn’t understand or know anything about law? But hey, he voted to convict since he said this is because he understood the case based on Farinas’ closing argument. 

As for Villar, I would have probably respected him more (not that I do respect him, as I once had an encounter with him that left a really bad taste on my mouth), if he had voted to acquit and didn’t just vote with the majority, just because he wants to be popular? Or didn't want to be left out? Or because his wife would be running in the next senate elections? After all, isn’t he a sort of closeted GMA ally? He should have just stuck with his loyalties or perhaps, he really has none (the virtue of loyalty, that is), who knows?

As for the reelectionists, they voted based on public opinion and hey, why did we even doubt that they would have done otherwise? 

And so, that closes the chapter of the 40+ days of the Coronanovella. Will we get a second season through a rumored Supreme Court appeal? I hope not. 

The country has survived the impeachment. Let’s just let it remain intact for now. Please.

As JPE has said "We must learn from this episode". I truly hope we did.

Closing Arguments

My hats off to Fariñas’, you have sealed the deal.

My first impression of Fariñas is of doubt, that is, he didn’t look particularly intelligent, his hair was dyed brown in a way that I’ve never seen any male public official has and all I knew about him was that he had a wife who committed suicide. 

But the first time I heard him speak in an interview in ANC on why he joined the prosecution team after their impeachment complaint filing, despite his non-signing of the complaint itself, I had thought he was fairly capable. I was actually disappointed that he wasn’t utilized in the trial that is, his article (I think it was article 6) was not brought out. 

A friend of mine recently commented that she didn’t think this Fariñas character looked credible or capable while we were watching the impeachment coverage, due to the same reasons that I had. And, I told her that she would be surprised that he's actually pretty good and that I've seen him in several interviews where he did fairly well. 

And, hey, I was proven right when Fariñas did a portion of the prosecution’s closing argument last Monday. Tupas’ performance was just "so, so". Sonny Belmonte’s was honorary but was a bore. Fariñas' was really on the mark. The whole “palusot” theme was brilliant, including the accompanying data on the FX rate at the time when Corona claimed he started saving in 1968 - that was great too. Fariñas' closing argument encapsulated the prosecution’s points and poked holes in all of Corona’s statements at the same time. Add to that he communicated it to the public extremely well. 

For me it is a major plus point that he spoke in a normal sounding and very comfortable Tagalog. I told my friend that see, this is a Tagalog statement that is not awkward and not the least bit annoying because it is clear that he normally speaks in Tagalog. He is comfortable with the language. Again, I say, a really small feat to ask seeing as we are all Filipinos and we should really all be comfortable using the national language. 

Meanwhile, the defense really just sounded lack lustered and boring. Yes, they may be talking about this or that law technicality, which might have some valid points somewhere there, however they still sounded boring. They probably didn’t get any plus points from the public opinion meter there as most probably wouldn't be able to grasp or care about half of what they were saying. 

Cuevas has proven that he’s a very brilliant lawyer but I suppose he has his limits. What can he really do when faced with that much of an overwhelmingly bad situation? He really has no other way that to go with the technicalities, what else does he really have then? 

Ang Mahiwagang Investment Strategy

After his 2 days on the witness stand, one has to wonder if this Corona is the least bit intelligent, that is, he kept portraying himself like he's stupid.

First off, his Tagalog just sound somewhat crude, which doesn’t help in making him look smart.

Then, it seems he can’t understand the senators’ questions as he doesn’t answer any question posted to him in a straight forward manner. (That is, he kept talking about his grandchild or daughter, or frugality, or lack of aircon or maid or some other similar drama). 

He says he doesn’t know what debit, credit and assets means.

He doesn’t know how to file his SALN.

He thinks just because his accounts are in dollars, he doesn't need to report them (or consider them assets). 

He doesn’t even know that he should eat lunch or at the very least drink coke or chew a candy for his long standing diabetic condition.  Either that, or he believed he could just walkaway from the senate and casually runaway just like that after his opening statement, which too sounds equally dumb.

He believes that USD hoarding is great investment strategy.

This list can go on… But I’m just saying that you start to wonder, if all these things are true and he is not perjuring himself over there, then well, the alternative is that he might actually just be DUMB. 

After his whole brouhaha last Tuesday about his seriously preposterous investment strategy that involves hoarding USD since the late 60s, I already started to wonder about his intelligence. Since, I must admit I’ve never heard of Corona until he was appointed by GMA to the Supreme Court. I've never really had much interest in him (why would I?) so I actually didn’t know much about his bio. So, I looked him up, I googled him. 

Turns out, he was a consistent honor student, went to Ateneo de Manila University (given he was just on a general studies course), was the editor in chief of Guidon, went to Ateneo Law school, ranked 25^th on his bar exams, and even went to Harvard. He actually was a tax lawyer for SGV and also went to Ateneo for MBA (minus his thesis).

So, hey, his credentials don’t seem like the credentials of an utterly dumb person, not one who won’t be able to understand basic accounting terms or principles since he did MBA and practiced tax law. I even heard from some anchor that he taught banking law or something like that. So, how can this person honestly declare that he doesn’t know what debit, credit or an asset is when a normal management university student already knows what these terms are.

Corona's credentials aren't even those of a person who would think HOARDING DOLLARS in his saving account for years would seem like a good idea. I mean, really?! I can’t help but wince, every time he says it, that this is the reason why he has so much USD in his bank accounts, that he has been keeping small portions of his salary for 40 years and converting them to dollars and just putting them in his bank accounts. (See, now I still feel like wincing.)  

First, it’s a really really really bad investment strategy and second, it’s not a particularly plausible explanation for the amount of USD that he has.

I think these 2 segments from ANC's Business Nightly program are good supplements to why his so called investment strategy is not exactly feasible or sound:  

Off the top of my head, here are some of the reasons why Corona's so called dollar investment strategy claims are just preposterous: 

Even if the USD has gained multiple times since the rate has been 2:1, there was no way that a college level Corona would even be able to predict that it will become 43:1 40 years after.

The FX rates fluctuate all the time. There was the Asian financial crisis and the time when the FX rate hit 50 and everyone converted only to have it drop to the 40s range – a lot of the people I know got burned at that time. These occurrences alone would make any person wary of converting all his money to dollars. In the recent years alone, the Peso has become stronger and the current global financial crisis hasn’t made anyone confident about the US market, the US banks or the US dollars for that matter.

Why would someone that smart just keep all his cash in USD and just keep it liquid in his bank account?

Add to all this the interest rates are so low these days, peso current account don’t even give you 1% anymore, the USD interest rates are likewise very low. Why would you dump your money in a sad savings account or even in a time deposit these days? Since he has the position and the connections, certainly he would have a lot of friends and resources to point him to a better investment pool. These days the stock market is doing so well, for example. Are you telling me he would rather just let his USD sleep there in his bank account just like that? 

Which brings me to my point, the thing is: If he isn’t truly dumb, then he wasn’t being honest. And if he is actually incredibly smart, as his bio says he is, then it follows that he was perjuring himself on the witness stand this entire time. 

Which is it, do you think?

The Anti-Gaga Issue

I've often said the Church these days are trying their best to keep themselves relevant by inserting themselves on various issues such as putting their weight on being anti-RH bill or anti-divorce, even when the whole world has evolved into supporting women’s health and choices or their right to remarry when they've made a mistake (and it so frequently happens) the first time around.

I’m all for respecting everyone’s religion and beliefs. But there really are just representatives of religious organizations, such as the Christians, that give everyone else in their group a bad name. Case in point, these ridiculous Lady Gaga protests. Boy, am I not surprised that the group protesting are Christians. And, boy am I not surprised that the CBCP also made their comments on the issue, as are they not always looking for trendy issues to insert themselves in to get themselves some desperate publicity these days?

So, this Biblemode Youth Philippines group protested and performed candlelight vigils against Lady Gaga (CUE: roll eyes).

A Christian group's protest against Lady Gaga - wow, 

they even made an effort to print matching protest shirts

Some quotes (like these below) have been said:

“Her attitude seems to promote godlessness, offensive to any religion,” Sorsogon Bishop Arturo Bastes, a member of the Permanent Council of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, told reporters.

“We believe that this concert is grossly blasphemous, immoral, lewd, obscene and carries demonic and occultic undertones that are insults to our God and are direct attacks against our Christian faith,” Fred Magbanua, one of the Christian leaders, said. “(The concert) greatly endangers the hearts and minds of our young people, as it overtly promotes satanic worship and sexual perversity.”

“This concert has to be banned,” said Manila Rep. Benny Abante, who is also a religious leader. “We will pray against it and do everything we can to oppose it on all fronts,” he said.

And so it goes… Religious leaders went as far as calling “Born this way” an encouragement to homosexuality. Really? It’s a song about accepting who you are and about being yourself, you know, cause you were born this way, and somehow these religious groups has morphed the song into being pro homosexuality? - which really isn’t a bad thing, anyway. 

Lady Gaga herself is obviously someone who loves the attention and all the controversy that surrounds her. Why else would she do all these things that she does so well?! Wear meat outfits, gyrate around the stage or play the piano while doing weird acrobatic suggestive movements? 

Well, because Lady Gaga is a great concept. It’s a fabulous persona for a pop star. This outrageous, attention seeking, Madonna-esqe approach, has worked wonders for her career so far. AND, it has made a lot of her music videos and concerts entertaining.  

I’ve always said I loved her songs but I don’t particularly love her overt attention seeking behavior. She once claimed that she loved walking around in her underwear in public (or something that sounds like that), which was obviously said to elicit some buzz, and I don't particularly like this blatant overt reach for explicit attention but I get it. I get why she needs to do it. 

AND: It’s entertainment. People know that. No one actually takes Lady Gaga THAT seriously. 

Personally, I thought the concert was just great. The set was gorgeous, what's not to love about her multi color electric lights castle?

Lady Gaga performed really well. Her costumes were really cool. I especially like that meat grinder scene - I don't really know why but I just thought it was cute. 

Throughtout the concert she reinforced her message of acceptance, of wishing the best for all her fans - the opposite of what religious groups says she's about. 

And, well, she also repeatedly said that she doesn't give a fuck (about what the establishment though), which is also kind of cool. 

In summary: it was a kick ass fun concert and everyone had a grand time, sans satanic overtures. 

So, Christian groups:  if you’re bored and are looking for something or someone to roast or look down upon, just – I don’t know, chill out – go on a prayer meeting and try to imbibe the virtues of respecting other people’s beliefs (or entertainment choices). Stop imposing - whatever it is that you want your flock to avoid – to other people. 

And, CBCP: just accept that you guys are no longer as relevant rather than trying to keep up with the youth by issuing statements on Lady Gaga and Jessica Sanchez. 

Ironically though, the way I see it, these Christian groups, the CBCP and Lady Gaga has this one thing in common: It's Attention Seeking Behavior. 

Day 40: Corona, the Dramatic Diva

Just when I was saying that it is, what it is and that Corona should just stop insulting the people by continuing to play the victim (speaking in Tagalog, with his “kodigo”, and doing his best “kawawa” look), he ups his level and walks out, then claims that he was dizzy and hypoglycemic when his move was met with a senate lock down, and suddenly his people brings out a wheelchair, GMA style!

Walkouts and Wheelchairs

To sum up the defense strategy, it's to: Deny, deny, deny to death.  Threaten. Accuse. Promise to open Corona’s accounts. Promise that Corona will explain. Delay. Deny. Threaten the government. Keep mentioning Hacienda Luisita, over and over.  Accuse everyone else.  Delay to the point of making everyone doubt if Corona would ever truly testify. Then let Corona have a 3 hour opening statement. Let Corona dramatize his life (no maids, no aircon, family feud, mother has cancer, etc.) Cry. Declare that Corona will open his accounts. Let him sign the waiver (for dramatic effect) then make it conditional – he will only open it if the other congressmen also open theirs. Call this gesture something that’s for the country...  Then, well, disappear... If this fails (well, if there is an unexpected lock down), bring out the wheelchair, claim he has some illness. Let Corona come out in said wheelchair, let him close his eyes on camera like he's in pain. AND – EVADE CROSS EXAMINATION.

What’s next, St. Lukes? This is what everyone on social media said, as a half joke earlier tonight, you know, so he may follow his best bud GMA and they can be wheelchair buddies or hospital room buddies or neck brace buddies (should he choose to sport the same props). However, it’s apparently not St. Lukes, just to add a little surprise element to the drama, he went to Medical City instead. Deja vu, anyone?

The Truth?

But seriously, truth and transparency need not be so complicated and so lengthy. If they could say it straight up, wouldn’t they have done so by now?

All I’ve heard of so far are all accusations mixed with alleged plausible explanations on why his property and his bank accounts do not match his SALN – and hey regardless of how many accounts or properties he admitted to, they still don’t match his SALN and isn’t this the point?

What do we know so far? What message has been communicated? What are these “plausible explanations”?

Based on his opening statement, the bottom line is that ALL the discrepancies on his SALN are either:

1. Not his money as it came from: 

• Basa Guidote's (a company his wife stole from her family, which includes an aging nun that basically has nothing to gain from lying about him since she lives in a convent and probably really isn’t after the money
•  his mother's (who as he highlights has cancer btw)
•  his child's (who is so industrious that she has 2 jobs in the US)
•  His 40 year monthly savings (that he has been stashing away in USD because he believes this is a great investment strategy – Really? To just keep it liquid, kept in his bank accounts, when PHP has been gaining on the USD these past years and with the interest rates so low as well).

2. Due to mysterious defects of the properties – all bought on sale or some discounted arrangements because, apparently, he just loves to buy defective properties. 

3. Because he believes that if his money is in USD, he doesn’t need to put it in his SALN because it’s protected by the foreign currency secrecy law. (So, all embezzlers should probably convert their money to dollars and this will shield them from all kinds of prosecution – you know, because they are just following the interpretation of the law of the current chief justice. HMM?)  

I don’t know about you but all these don’t sound particularly uncomplicated, just seems like a zigzag roundabout way to explain his discrepant SALN.

Just because of his interpretation

So, he is technically appointed the Chief Justice because the judiciary (him included) voted to exempt his appointment from the ban.

The TRO to disallow opening his PS bank accounts, as decided by the judiciary (which he is the head of) was issued.

And, he doesn’t put his USD accounts into his SALN because based on his own interpretation of the law, he doesn’t have to?

Is it just me or isn’t all of these called - Conflict of Interest? 

But hey, we're all still suppose to think its valid, just because...?