Massive scale corruption exposed/unfolding

[ClaNker]

Is ERAP the better pressident? Accused of taking jueteng money, and until now jueteng is still ongoing and profit from.operation of jueteng does not get taxed.

We had presidents accused of taking hard earned taxes but not jueteng money.

Which of the two types would you want to sit in malacanang.

Erap took both.

[macsd]

Ang mga POTang senatong na sila Tenga, Keso at Kampanero kasama na si bulldog De Apat, gustong sampahan ng kaso si JLN ng perjury & contempt dahil nagsinungaling daw si JLN. Kung hindi ba naman sila napaka dakilang mga tanga, eh alam na nila sa umpisa pa lang wala silang makukuha testimony kay JNL and that was even stated by Drilon and supported by Conchita. Common sense which obviously these goverment officials lack badly tells us that her case is already being reviewed by the Ombudsman and should it materialize, she faces plunder case at Sandigan Bayan. So why would she say anything that will incriminate her in the court of law. These goverment officials had a bad notion that the Blue Ribbon is an investigation for aid of legislation, it is not a court of law. If they want to know the truth and extract information in aid of legislation, they should ask the Ombudsman to expedite her investigation to file immediate case at Sandigan then accelerate the court hearings and what ever verdict there will be, that's where they should base their aid of legislation. Ang problema sa kanila, nagfile agad sila ng kaso bago sila nag Blue Ribbon. The obvious is bound to happen if they are not a bunch of idiots who only want to grandstand.

As if they are not a bunch of lawyers that an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. JLN has the right to against self incrimination whether she lies or not, that is for the court to decide, not an investigation.

I dare them to call tanda, pogi & seksi in their investigation and i am 1000% sure, they will invoke the same. Let see if they will have the guts to site them for contempt & perjury. Ang mahirap sa mga potang ina nila, matatapang lang sila kay juan dela cruz, pag sa mga kapwa nila kawatan, takot din sila in the disguise of mutual respect to a colleague of same stature. ******* sila, hindi nila alam, temporary lang lahat ang katayuan nila, darating din ang araw tulad din uli sila ni juan dela cruz na sisipa-sipain lang.

It's time to abolish the legislature as they are just a bunch of idiots if not stealing taxpayers hard earned money wasting it in non-sense. No wonder this country is headed no where as we keep on having goverment officials from the hell. :evil:

[ClaNker]

Ang mga POTang senatong na sila Tenga, Keso at Kampanero kasama na si bulldog De Apat, gustong sampahan ng kaso si JLN ng perjury & contempt dahil nagsinungaling daw si JLN. Kung hindi ba naman sila napaka dakilang mga tanga, eh alam na nila sa umpisa pa lang wala silang makukuha testimony kay JNL and that was even stated by Drilon and supported by Conchita. Common sense which obviously these goverment officials lack badly tells us that her case is already being reviewed by the Ombudsman and should it materialize, she faces plunder case at Sandigan Bayan. So why would she say anything that will incriminate her in the court of law. These goverment officials had a bad notion that the Blue Ribbon is an investigation for aid of legislation, it is not a court of law. If they want to know the truth and extract information in aid of legislation, they should ask the Ombudsman to expedite her investigation to file immediate case at Sandigan then accelerate the court hearings and what ever verdict there will be, that's where they should base their aid of legislation. Ang problema sa kanila, nagfile agad sila ng kaso bago sila nag Blue Ribbon. The obvious is bound to happen if they are not a bunch of idiots who only want to grandstand.

As if they are not a bunch of lawyers that an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. JLN has the right to against self incrimination whether she lies or not, that is for the court to decide, not an investigation.

I dare them to call tanda, pogi & seksi in their investigation and i am 1000% sure, they will invoke the same. Let see if they will have the guts to site them for contempt & perjury. Ang mahirap sa mga potang ina nila, matatapang lang sila kay juan dela cruz, pag sa mga kapwa nila kawatan, takot din sila in the disguise of mutual respect to a colleague of same stature. ******* sila, hindi nila alam, temporary lang lahat ang katayuan nila, darating din ang araw tulad din uli sila ni juan dela cruz na sisipa-sipain lang.

It's time to abolish the legislature as they are just a bunch of idiots if not stealing taxpayers hard earned money wasting it in non-sense. No wonder this country is headed no where as we keep on having goverment officials from the hell. :evil:

Conchita already advised the senate against it but who can stop them. It's all for media mileage.

We all are in this hell hole because the same moron juan dela cruz votes for them each and every time. PNoy only won because of sympathy vote, otherwise ERAP would have been the President. I mean just look at Binay... walang ginagawa, but deym look at how public rate him.

[falken]

Ang mga POTang senatong na sila Tenga, Keso at Kampanero kasama na si bulldog De Apat, gustong sampahan ng kaso si JLN ng perjury & contempt dahil nagsinungaling daw si JLN. Kung hindi ba naman sila napaka dakilang mga tanga, eh alam na nila sa umpisa pa lang wala silang makukuha testimony kay JNL and that was even stated by Drilon and supported by Conchita. Common sense which obviously these goverment officials lack badly tells us that her case is already being reviewed by the Ombudsman and should it materialize, she faces plunder case at Sandigan Bayan. So why would she say anything that will incriminate her in the court of law. These goverment officials had a bad notion that the Blue Ribbon is an investigation for aid of legislation, it is not a court of law. If they want to know the truth and extract information in aid of legislation, they should ask the Ombudsman to expedite her investigation to file immediate case at Sandigan then accelerate the court hearings and what ever verdict there will be, that's where they should base their aid of legislation. Ang problema sa kanila, nagfile agad sila ng kaso bago sila nag Blue Ribbon. The obvious is bound to happen if they are not a bunch of idiots who only want to grandstand.

As if they are not a bunch of lawyers that an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. JLN has the right to against self incrimination whether she lies or not, that is for the court to decide, not an investigation.

I dare them to call tanda, pogi & seksi in their investigation and i am 1000% sure, they will invoke the same. Let see if they will have the guts to site them for contempt & perjury. Ang mahirap sa mga potang ina nila, matatapang lang sila kay juan dela cruz, pag sa mga kapwa nila kawatan, takot din sila in the disguise of mutual respect to a colleague of same stature. ******* sila, hindi nila alam, temporary lang lahat ang katayuan nila, darating din ang araw tulad din uli sila ni juan dela cruz na sisipa-sipain lang.

It's time to abolish the legislature as they are just a bunch of idiots if not stealing taxpayers hard earned money wasting it in non-sense. No wonder this country is headed no where as we keep on having goverment officials from the hell. :evil:

Sa umpisa pa lang, alam na nating magpapapogi lang nga kumag na iyan.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

[A121]

Parating ginagawang excuse ang "corruption" at "tanga" ang mga botante sa Pilipinas kaya hindi umuunlad.

IMHO, the people in other Asian countries are no smarter than us and yet they are able to progress. Sa Taiwan nga nagsusuntukan yung mga pulitiko nila pero they are doing good in terms of technology.

[antonath]

Masyado kasing walang ngipin ang justice system dito sa ph eh. Napaka bagal pa umusad ang kaso.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tsikot Car Forums mobile app

[donbuggy]

Corruption existed in the Philippines for a long time.

A Fiddler's Brew: The Harry Stonehill Story

But the most damning piece of evidence against Stonehill was the discovery of the so called "Blue Book". It was where Stonehill listed the names of more than 200 public officials, businessmen, and media people who received money from him in exchange for favors, and information. The then Senator Ferdinand E. Marcos was said to be on the list and even President Diosdado Macapagal himself ( having received 3Million Pesos worth of campaign funds).

Fun fact:

Stan Lee and Harry Stonehill were friends.

Stan Lee Was Smarter Than He Knew When He Turned Down Harry Stonehill - Forbes

Stan and Harry were Army buddies. Stan actually had the opportunity to be Harry’s partner. He talks about it in his autobiography Excelsior. Harry wanted him to go to the Philippines to sell Christmas cards. They kept in touch as Harry diversified and became fabulously wealthy. When Stan asked Harry what kind of a car he was driving, Harry said that, through his dealerships, he owned half the cars in the Philippines.

[Retz]

DAP is not PDAF
By Artemio V. Panganiban
Philippine Daily Inquirer

The Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) is detested because the law creating it is unconstitutional; it authorizes lawmakers to implement laws in violation of the doctrine of separation of powers. Worse, the PDAF fosters corruption and has, in fact, been used as a scam to siphon public funds to fake nongovernment organizations to undertake ghost projects. Hence, it must be banished, and the scammers punished.

What is DAP? What about the Disbursement Acceleration Program or DAP? Is it identical to and detestable like the PDAF? No, the DAP is not the same as the PDAF. Legally speaking, it is not pork barrel. It is not a lump-sum appropriation in the national budget (General Appropriations Act or GAA). Neither is it disbursed only upon the direction of lawmakers to executive agencies and NGOs chosen by them.

Per Budget Secretary Florencio Abad, “the DAP is a stimulus package under the Aquino administration designed to fast-track public spending and push economic growth.” On Oct. 29, fellow Inquirer columnist Ciel Habito wrote: “Economic data indicate that the hiked spending achieved its professed goal of reigniting economic growth… The Philippine economy is now the fastest-growing economy in Asia, thanks in large part to the DAP.”

I defer to the above economic evaluation of the DAP. Let me just focus on some relevant legal principles to help readers understand it.

Abad said the DAP is sourced from (1) “savings” or unspent appropriations and (2) “unprogrammed funds” which are “windfall revenue collections,” like large dividends from government corporations and financial institutions (SSS, GSIS, Landbank, etc.), and proceeds of the sale of government assets and of new loans.

Savings as a source. Abad further explained that the President, via the Department of Budget and Management, “realigned” unspent appropriations (or “savings”) in the executive branch and used these to “augment” existing appropriations also in the executive branch. The “augmented” items are collectively called the DAP. Simply then, the DAP is really an accumulation of budget savings.

This transfer of savings from one budget item to another finds basis in Art. VI, Sec. 25 (5) of the Constitution which states “[T]he President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of the Constitutional Commissions may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.”

Note that the Constitution allows augmentation only if it is authorized “by law.” Accordingly, Abad pointed to the Administrative Code (AC) as that law. Specifically, the AC states that “savings” may be used to settle 13 types of obligations, the most crucial of which are “priority activities that will produce the economic wellbeing of the nation, including food production, agrarian reform, energy development, disaster relief, and rehabilitation.”

In another section, the AC also says that “any savings in the regular appropriations authorized in the [GAA] for programs and projects of any department, office or agency, may, with the approval of the President, be used to cover a deficit in any other item of the regular appropriations…”

In yet another section, the AC authorizes the President “to suspend or otherwise stop further expenditures of funds allotted for any agency…”
Another set of laws, the GAAs for 2011, 2012 and 2013, allows the President (and other heads of government) “to augment any item in the [budget] from savings in other items…”
The term “savings” refers to “portions or balances of any programmed appropriation … free from any obligation or encumbrance” due to (1) the completion or discontinuance of the activity for which the appropriation was made, or (2) personnel vacancies or unused leaves of absences, or (3) completion of projects or targets at lesser cost than planned.

Unprogrammed funds. The President’s budget proposal to Congress contains revenue targets. When fund sources not originally included in such targets are collected in the course of the year, the 2011, 2012 and 2013 GAAs authorized the President to use these funds to finance unprogrammed projects included in the budget.
That the DAP is not the same as the PDAF may be the reason the Supreme Court did not issue a temporary restraining order immediately, unlike in the PDAF cases in which a TRO was instantly issued. But even if the DAP is not the same as the PDAF, is the DAP nonetheless unconstitutional on other grounds? I won’t answer this question now, lest I preempt the oral argument on Nov. 19.

Let me just say that the legality of the DAP, in my humble view, hinges on whether the AC and GAA provisions cited by Secretary Abad (and their implementation) will pass the constitutional test that no public money may be spent without congressional authority, and that savings may be transferred from one budget item to augment another budget item already existing in the same GAA. Augmentation cannot be used to create a new item or to fund a new project not previously authorized by law.

Also, a transfer may be made from one budget item to another in the same branch of government only. Finally, legislators may recommend projects, but only for those already authorized by law and only if the recommendations do not bind the executive agencies.

Lack of space prevents me from writing more. But I hope the above will help readers understand the DAP’s legal issues.

Source: DAP is not PDAF | Inquirer Opinion

DAP is not PDAF | Inquirer Opinion

[macsd]

DAP is not PDAF | Inquirer Opinion

No one has now the right to say who and what the heck is DAP. It's now left to the Supreme Court to decide.

[Retz]

^

Again, that is just an opinion of sir panganiban and stated in the article is the main argument of the executive. Ultimately, SC will decide the legality of DAP.