Political Shorts

 

The Vice President Sara Duterte said: "The nation is in chaos." Salita nang salita na naman si Madam. Nasa criticize mode and mood.

Sagot tuloy ni Claire Castro: "Sino nga ba ang gumagawa ng gulo para magka-chaos? Oo nga naman ... di ba naman ang pagiging chaotic ang gusto nilang mangyari?

                                                **************

Mga patutsada ni Sara Duterte ... "Si Claire Castro ay spokesperson ni BBM. At dahil spokesperson ka ... dapat maging professional ka sa mga sinasabi mo."

Dr. Antonio Contreras (professor and political scientist) said: "Natawa ako dito. Itong babaeng ito na mahilig magmura, nanapak ng sheriff, at nagbanta sa buhay ng Presidente, First Lady, at dating Speaker, malakas ang loob na magsalita tungkol sa pagiging professional?"

                                                **************

Mabuti pa si Dr. Antonio Contreras NATAWA lang. Yon ang professional. Kahit nagngingitngit na ... he is playing it cool.

Ang mga readers naman ay hindi NATUWA. Naha-high blood at nawiwindang sila.

                                                **************

Hindi ba ninyo napansin na may similarity si Inday Sara at si Senador Binoe. Bago sila magsalita, dapat manalamin muna. 

Inday repeatedly criticizes BBM about corruption and a seeming lack of transparency ... when she was impeached for plunder and the same. 

Si Binoe naman inuusisa ang mga credentials ng mga witnesses ... the very credentials na wala rin sa kanya,  tapos yon ang hinahanap niya for being the number one senator.

                                                **************

Mali na naman ang pasok ni Idol Robin. Mahilig kasi sa mga credentials at details. Tanong niya kay Wamil: Kayo ba ang in charge sa imbestigasyon?

Wamil: Hindi po investigation, Your Honor. Evaluation po yong ginagawa namin.

                                                **************

Sa impeachment trial, ayaw ng depensa na mag-stipulate. What are they thinking? The trial is no longer about paperwork. It is about public trust.

Ano ba ang ayaw nila sa mga dokumento ng prosecution? Ayan, nasabihan tuloy sila ni Atty. Lorna Kapunan ng: O sige, ang mga documents ninyo na lang ang gagamitin. Wala naman kaming problema diyan.

                                                **************

Zubiri: "Obviously, Mr. Witness, pag sinabing confidential in nature, huwag na kayong magtanong, basta ginamit naman ’yong pera. Sa tingin mo ba, tama ba ’yon o hindi."

Wamil: "Hindi po, Your Honor, kasi ang confidential funds ay public funds pa rin naman po, so it must follow strict accounting and auditing rules para maiwasan ang misuse."

                                                **************

Ubos na ang pasensya ng mga Pinoy sa mga senador na mahilig mag-grandstanding. Kaya nararamdaman ng mga tao ang pagkasuklam ni Wamil nang barahin niya ang scripted na drama ni Imee Marcos. 

Kitang-kita ang gustong mag-aakto na parang biktima si Imee habang pinipilit na ilihis ang pananagutan. 

                                                **************

(Desperate Question) Imee: May sinabi ba sa audit report na ninakaw o ginamit sa pansarili ang confidential funds ng OVP?

(Rock-solid answer) Wamil: Hindi kailangang isulat ang "ninakaw".  Sa joint circular ... kapag hindi maipaliwanag ang paggastos ... automatic ang legal presumption na ginamit ito sa "pansariling pakinabang."

                                                **************

To the readers watching, Imee's interpolation was not an inquiry: She did not want the truth. She wanted an echo. She bullied the witness to match her fake version of events. 

There was zero neutrality. She traded her gavel for a megaphone to bark her narrative. She was not a senator-judge; she was the VP's attack dog.

                                                **************

Pansinin natin: di ba dapat pag ang senator-judge asks a question, the questions are supposed to clarify, to know and understand?

What we saw was Imee became Sara. Hindi siya nagtatanong ... she was twisting the witness's arms, and she insisted on the kind of narrative she wanted ... her own edition and version.

                                                **************

Imee wasn’t asking a question; she was interrogating a witness with her mind already made up. 

She was aggressively shoving her own script down everyone's throats like a rabid attack dog instead of doing her basic job as a senator-judge.

                                                **************

And then there was Chiz telling Wamil not to argue with a senator-judge. It was absurd and made no sense. Why shouldn’t he push back when she’s forcing a flawed narrative? 

"Chiz instructing Wamil not to engage with a senator-judge is unreasonable. A witness has every right to correct a misrepresentation of his testimony. What was he expected to do—acquiesce while his statements were deliberately distorted?" Was he just supposed to nod politely while she twisted his words?

                                                **************