Tag: Salvador Panelo

Posted on

Lacson Swats Away Panelo’s Prejudgment of Impeachment Trial Votes

Senate President Pro Tempore Panfilo “Ping” M. Lacson swatted away as “nonsensical” the prejudgment by ex-presidential legal counsel Salvador Panelo on how he and other senators would vote should the impeachment case of Vice President Sara Duterte reach the Senate.

Lacson particularly took issue with Panelo’s claim that he, Senate President Vicente Sotto III, and Senators Risa Hontiveros and Francis Pangilinan would vote to convict the Vice President.

“Why is Panelo trying to sound smarter than us? No one can speak on my behalf. And I have said this before – we’ll always be guided by the evidence. We haven’t reached the trial stage, why is he preempting us and calling us ‘pusakal/feral’?” he said in a mix of English and Filipino in an interview on Storycon on One News. “Is he a soothsayer? What if I say he’s a pusakal/feral soothsayer?”

“He isn’t just a feral dog. He’s an idiot,” Lacson said of Panelo.

In Filipino: Lacson, Tinaboy si Panelo sa ‘Prejudgment’ Nito sa Boto sa Impeachment Trial

Continue reading “Lacson Swats Away Panelo’s Prejudgment of Impeachment Trial Votes”

Posted on

On the Claims by Sec. Salvador Panelo on the PH-US VFA

It is a no-brainer that my friend from way back, Salvador Panelo, being a member of the President’s Cabinet, will defend him, right or wrong. Hence, I’m willing to give him enough leeway.

That said, Art. VII, Sec. 21 of the 1987 Constitution is clear and unequivocal on the participation of each and every Senator in voting for or against the ratification of a treaty or international agreement, which the PH-US Visiting Forces Agreement is.

In fact, official records of the Senate will tell us that the vote on May 27, 1999 was 18-5, without which the same would not have been valid and effective.

More importantly: Whether or not an international agreement or a treaty has already been made valid and effective, it is still wrong to assert that a sitting senator and even an ordinary citizen of this country has no more freedom to express his opinion with something that concerns our national interest.

*****

Posted on

#PingSays: Sec. Panelo’s ‘Referral’ for ex-Mayor Sanchez; Sanchez Release and GCTA Issue | Sept. 3, 2019

In an interview, Sen. Lacson answered questions on:
– Sec. Panelo’s ‘referral’ for ex-Mayor Sanchez
– Senate Bill 993, repealing RA 10592
– BuCor head Faeldon’s inconsistencies on Sanchez release

Related:
At the Hearing on the Release of Heinous Crime Convicts via GCTA (Sept. 2)
‘Bakit Kailangan Madaliin?’ BuCor Execs Grilled over Hurry to Release ‘Special’ Convicts (Sept. 5)
Facebooking from Maximum Security: Mobile Phones, Drugs and Firearms in Bilibid (Sept. 9)
‘TALAMAK ANG KORAPSYON!’ 7 Major Moneymaking Schemes at Bilibid Bared (Sept. 12)
QUOTES and NOTES: 
Continue reading “#PingSays: Sec. Panelo’s ‘Referral’ for ex-Mayor Sanchez; Sanchez Release and GCTA Issue | Sept. 3, 2019”

Posted on

Interviews on DWIZ: Remedies to GCTA Law; Who Signed Release Papers for Chiong Case Convicts? | Aug. 31, 2019

In interviews on DWIZ, Sen. Lacson answered questions on:
– possible legislative remedies to the GCTA law
– irony of the release of convicted drug lords via GCTA amid anti-drug war
– the woman who signed the release papers for Chiong case convicts
– ‘Designated Survivor’ bill

Quotes from the interviews…
 Continue reading “Interviews on DWIZ: Remedies to GCTA Law; Who Signed Release Papers for Chiong Case Convicts? | Aug. 31, 2019”

Posted on

From Chinese Embassy Defense Counsel to Spokesman?

Sec. Panelo: “Ambassador Zhao sent me a text. He said, ‘What if we also think that your overseas workers are also spying on us. What can you say about that?'” … PRESIDENTIAL SPOKESPERSON OR CHINESE EMBASSY SPOKESMAN?

Has the presidential spokesman switched from Chinese embassy defense counsel to spokesman?

What I was pointing out in my tweet is not on the issue of whether or not there is logic in the Chinese ambassador’s statement.

The thing is, the Chinese embassy has its own spokesman who should speak on their behalf because that’s his job. Why would the country’s presidential spokesperson whose salary and other miscellaneous expenses are being paid out of our taxes take on the embassy spokesman’s job?

*****