Deadlines. Won’t be able to blog till after Friday. Hagsville.
Edvard Munch. The Scream. 1893. Oil, tempera and pastel on cardboard. 91 x 73.5 cm. Nasjonalgalleriet, Oslo, Norway. From abcgallery.com
Month: October 2007
William Turner. “Frosty Morning.” 1813. Oil on canvas. Tate Gallery, London, UK. Right-clicked from abcgallery.com
PAGC will proceed at its usual pace, i.e., snail’s pace, until the Malacañang payoff scandal (it happened in Malacañang, I think we can safely refer to it that way) fades away or is replaced by another “trouble”. If it were really keen in its public pronouncement this morning, it would have done the following today, this morning, this afternoon:
1.Motored to Pampanga and request Gov. Ed Panlilio to be allowed to take a look at the bundles of money. They would then document it, photograph it from all angles, all sides, jot down the serial numbers, etc.. Then they would motor to Bulacan to request Gov. Jonjon Mendoza for the same thing. PAGC said today they wanted to find the source of the money. Then, look at the evidence! Duh.
2. They would find today, this morning, (at least from the bundles in the custody of Gov. Ed Panlilio) that the bundles bear the seal, logo, and name of Bank of Commerce. They would find the stamped date July 11, 2007 (or July 2) on the bundles.
3. In the afternoon of the same day today they would have gone to the branches of Bank of Commerce in Manila to ask to look at their records for July 11, 2007 (or July 2). They would not be allowed by the bank managers.
4. They would then drive to Malacañang then ask the President: “Ma’am, can you help us here, these are the photos of the evidence. Here. It shows the name of the bank. Since we don’t have any kind of jurisdiction or powers, can you ask the Bangko Sentral if they can help us with the records?” Or better yet, PAGC would ask: “Ma’am, do you know of any presidential appointee who has an account with Bank of Commerce? Since our “mandate” covers only presidential appointees….Oh, by the way, do you know of any family member of yours who has an account in the Bank of Commerce? Would you have an account in the Bank of Commerce?”
5.She would reply, “What are you talking about?” and they would say, “Ma’am we’re trying to locate the source of the money…” and she would say “What are you talking about?!” And they would have to stop.
6.If they were still keen, they would, today, in the afternoon of the same day today or maybe first thing tomorrow morning, make an ocular inspection of the scene of the incident. Malacañang Heroes’ Hall, Palace Guest House, then back to Malacañang Heroes Hall, then the parking lot. Just an ocular.
7.On the same day, they would then ask to look at the tapes of the security cameras for Thursday, October 11, 2007, between 10:00 am to 4:00 pm for Heroes’ Hall, Palace Guest House, then parking lot. The PSG and security personnel would stop them. They would politely say, “This is by authority of the President. Please let us through.” The security would tell them, “we’ll have to clear it with Ma’am.” The security would ask for security clearance from Ed Ermita or President Gloria. Nada. No go. They would then tell PAGC, “Boss, hindi pwede eh, national security.” (“sir, we can’t, it’s national security.”). Then they would stop.
8.And if they have a modicum of inductive ability, they would then and immediately write a report to the President on the preliminary result of their investigation, “Her Excellency, etc… Conclusion: to summarize, we have not been allowed access to the evidence in this case and denied any assistance for access to more evidence, and would therefore recommend that PAGC be given written authorization by your office to be allowed to see the security tapes; further, we would also request assistance from your office to communicate with Bangko Sentral. The foregoing is respectfully submitted for your consideration…”
But that’s not what’s going to happen. PAGC will give the participants in that Oct. 11 meeting ten or 15 days to submit affidavits, those participants will ask for time; so another 15 days; then on the 30th day their lawyers will file some sort of
“motion to dismiss” saying, “PAGC has no jurisdiction over governors and congressmen etc.”, then PAGC will issue an order after 15 days; then it will wait for other affidavits for another 15 days…. Then it’s already New Year, Happy New year! It’s 2008.
Just look at the security tapes, ano! Gosh. Why am I even presuming they’re serious about looking at the evidence?
Edvard Munch. “Vampire”. 1895-1902. Combined woodcut and lithograph. 38.5 x 55.3 cm. Munch Museum, Oslo, Norway. Right-clicked from abcgallery.com
Like developing a photo manually, the picture is getting clearer and the evidence more compelling: Baguio Rep. Mauricio Domogan, Manila’s 6th District Bienvenido Abante Jr., and Antique Governor Sally Perez (from reports of Inquirer.net, gmanews.tv, and ANC News, respectively) all confirm that the President, or her representative, or the House , casually hands out “cash gifts” in bags in amounts ranging from P200,000.oo to P500,000.ooo. Those who received them said it was in appreciation of their work, or for projects, or as allowance.
Could it be that those were given to them by reason of their office?
Or could it be that if they were ordinary folks, they would still be very loved dearly by the by the President, or her representative, or the House in amounts of P200,000.oo to P500,000.oo?
(the talkies of DILG Secretary Puno and some congressmen implicating the House or the Speaker is some sort of a veiled threat that the Speaker better “be careful” because it is insinuated that he is part of the happy tradition of “gift-giving”.
My Dear Abby advice: The following are the instances in which you can legally receive money from the President:
If it is non-public funds and together with any of the following instances:
1) For services rendered. You are her dentist, manicurist, speechwriter, her publicist/ PR person, her golf instructor, her private lawyer, her therapist, her chef, etc. (pay the income taxes on it)
2)It is for a piece of work (contract for a piece of work, there’s an output expected, like she asked you to paint her portrait or photograph her or write her biography)
3) She bought property from you; (pay the taxes on it)
4)You are her child/ dependent and it is your allowance;
5) She owed you money;
6) You are an heir and it is an advance of your legitime/ inheritance; (pay the taxes on it)
7) She lost in a legal form of gambling to you;
8) She became a Muslim boy and you are a Muslim girl and it is a dowry;
9) It is your birthday and you are really close;
10)It’s Christmas or somebody died or it’s you wedding or your child is her godchild and it’s your child’s birthday and he/she is really spoiled;
11) it is a straight donation, which is defined as an act of pure liberality and generosity (and not by reason of your office as legislator or local executive), she just loves you.
What about if the “cash gifts” were given as party funds distributed to partymates or to coalition allies or to possible recruits to the party?
I don’t know if you can use your office to do that, i.e., I don’t know if you are allowed to distribute funds on the pretext that they are party funds and at the same time use Palace functions, Palace activities, and your function as public official. It’s probably called corrupt practice.
Those are some of the instances that you can legally receive money from her: they’re non-public funds and any of the above (you are her child, etc. or her dependent, etc. or for services rendered, etc.)
