Impeachment against CJ Corona..

**shadow** · May 27th, 2012 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by glenn manikis

ha... ha... at the end of the day...

Nasa Diyos ang awa, nasa tao ang gawa. ... Nasa taong matapat ang huling halakhak. ....

mukhang hinde ka humahalakhak? Ano ba inside info? Convicted?

**Zeus** · May 27th, 2012 11:37 AM

Mukhang guilty ayon sa opinion ni dating Chief Justice Panganiban...
Historic decision | Inquirer Opinion

**glenn manikis** · May 27th, 2012 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by shadow

mukhang hinde ka humahalakhak? Ano ba inside info? Convicted?

Info?....

har... har.... har..... har..... har...... har... har.... har.... har... har!

lets wait nalang po.....

**wowiesy** · May 27th, 2012 12:13 PM

I think malakas ang gapangan this weekend... Kung meron man...

**111prez** · May 27th, 2012 01:04 PM

ang swing vote dyan ay galing sa grupo ni binay/estrada/UNA

sila ang mag desisyon kung impeached or not si corona

at siyempre, papayag ba sila ng isang supreme court at chief justice na appointee ni aquino especially with the pending roxas election protest and the upcoming elections?

**niky** · May 27th, 2012 01:33 PM

Even if Aquino appoints a new Justice, a majority of those remaining are PGMA appointees. There would be very little gain for Estrada et al by blocking just one appointment... just as there was little gain for Aquino to remove a single justice.

Put another way... na kay Aquino ang majority sa Senate, pero na kay Gloria pa rin majority sa SC... but they will be very wary of using their power for Corona if he is impeached. Alam nila yung opinion na ng mga lawyers and judges are against the Chief Justice after what happened last Tuesday and his brazen statements regarding the Constitution.

**fourtheboys96** · May 27th, 2012 02:31 PM

IMO, kung batas at batas lang ang pagbabasehan, malaki tsansa na ma-acquit.

pero ika nga, ang impeachment ay political process.

at alam natin na sa pulitika, ang nangunguna ay pansariling interes at hindi pambansang interes. so magandang silipin kung anu anong vested interest meron ang judges kung i-acquit nila or i-guilty verdict.

**explorer** · May 27th, 2012 02:50 PM

one milyon petot yata minimum asking price ni thief justice...

Are SC decisions linked to CJ transactions?

**andywesteast** · May 27th, 2012 03:13 PM

Originally Posted by explorer

one milyon petot yata minimum asking price ni thief justice...

Are SC decisions linked to CJ transactions?

Oops....

" Probably thinking that the OMB had no proof for her charge, given that the three complaints lodged with her merely cited evidence already presented in the impeachment court and overlooking the portion of her letter saying she had already conducted an initial investigation, the defense lawyers called her to the stand without foreknowledge of her testimony.

To their total surprise, the OMB waved 17 sheets of paper she obtained from the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) showing more than 400 transactions made by the respondent in his many accounts in five banks in 2003 to 2012.
Instead of recklessly haling the OMB to the witness stand, the defense lawyers—in response to her confidential letter—could have simply asked her to provide confidential details of her claimed dollar accounts. In this manner, they would have known in advance the bases of her letter and would not have extracted her damaging testimony.

The prosecution may have been aching to call the OMB to the stand but could not, because it had already rested its evidence. Moreover, the Supreme Court’s temporary restraining order barred it from looking into the respondent’s dollar accounts. But having called the OMB to the stand, the CJ’s lawyers cannot disown her testimony. Since she was their witness, albeit “hostile,” they were bound by her testimony, as aptly ruled by Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile." PDI, 5/26/12