Rodante Marcoleta charged with Plunder, Bribery at Ombudsman

1000028696.webp

You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.
 
Unahin mo baho mo o ng idolo mo kaysa ang iba. Gumagawa lang kayo ng isyu na walang katuturan kaysa sa inyo/amo mo ng bilyon-bilyon at mas nauna pa. Gawa pa kayo isyu kulang pa eh para naman makuha niyo na ang gusto niyo/amo mo.

Uto-uto!
Panatiko! isipin mo yung sinasabi mo, parang sarili mo sinasabihan mo eh? HAHAHAH.

unahin mo muna pagiging pilipino mo hindi pagsamba sa mga politiko! HAHAHAHHA

Sagutin mo yung mga issue ni Marcoleta since ito yung point ng discussion natin, daming ibang sinasabi eh HAHAHAHHA
 
Ba't di niyo maintindihan ang "ill-gotten wealth"? Para bagang napakahiwaga ng termino na yan para hindi nyo lubos maintindihan.

Dahil ba sa may donasyon matatawag na ba na plunder?

Eh di sana andami dyan na hindi honest na hindi man nangangalahati o maski sa kalingkingan ng natanggap ni Marcoleta pero dahil sa may masamang hangarin kaya di transparent kaya ayaw magsabi.

Yan ang idol niyo? Wala lakas ng loob maging transparent? Bakit ba? Dahil ba sa sila ay mandarambong?
Ang "ill-gotten wealth" ay hindi lang basta "may tinanggap." Ibig sabihin nito, nakuha sa ilegal na paraan, bribery, malversation, o pang-aabuso sa posisyon, kaya hindi porke't may donasyon, automatic na "ill-gotten" na 'yon.respicio+1

Pero ito ang punto: hindi lang basta "nag-donate sila" ang isyu kay Marcoleta. Tumanggap siya ng ₱30M mula kay Mike Defensor, ₱25M kay Espiritu, at ₱20M kay Viray noong Enero 2025, pero wala 'to sa SALN niya, at sa Comelec ay "no cash or in-kind contributions" ang report niya. Legal requirement 'yon sa lahat ng public officials, kung hindi mo idineklara ang malaking pondong tumapat sa iyo, tanong talaga kung bakit itinago. Sabi mismo ni Marcoleta sa counter-affidavit niya, ginastos na raw ang pera bago pa niya i-prepare ang SALN, pero hindi 'yon sapat na dahilan legally, dahil kailangan mo pa ring i-report ang natanggap mo kahit nagastos na.

Ngayon, patas na tanong: Mike Defensor mismo ang isa sa mga donor dito, at kung titingnan natin ang record niya, pinangalanan din siya ng NBI bilang nag-alok ng ₱5M sa bawat isa sa 18 ex-Marines para mag-testify tungkol sa flood control *******. Nagsampa na rin si dating Sen. Trillanes ng cyberlibel at perjury cases laban sa mga Marines na ito kaugnay ng ibang isyu.
 
Unahin mo baho mo o ng idolo mo kaysa ang iba. Gumagawa lang kayo ng isyu na walang katuturan kaysa sa inyo/amo mo ng bilyon-bilyon at mas nauna pa. Gawa pa kayo isyu kulang pa eh para naman makuha niyo na ang gusto niyo/amo mo.

Uto-uto!
We don't care about BBM. File a case if you want after his term; that would be beneficial for both of us. But the thing is, di naman kailangang mag-fill out ang isang private citizen kung hindi naman siya public official. Si Makubeta ay isang public official; congressman siya noong nakatanggap siya ng donasyon na hindi man lang niya inilagay sa kanyang SALN, and we all know naman that those donors are all against the current administration.
 
Who is Teddy Casiño?

The Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees (Republic Act No. 6713): Section 7(d) explicitly prohibits public officials and employees from directly or indirectly soliciting or accepting any gift, favor, loan, or anything of monetary value in the course of their official duties. [You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.]
The Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (Republic Act No. 3019): This law penalizes the act of a public officer requesting or receiving any gift, present, or benefit in connection with government contracts or transactions. [You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now., You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.]
Presidential Decree No. 46: Issued in 1972, this decree makes it an offense for public officials to receive gifts—and for private individuals to give them—on any occasion, including Christmas

The gift was given before he became a PH Official (Senator) as a campaign fund. Wag 8080.
 
Who is Teddy Casiño?

The Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees (Republic Act No. 6713): Section 7(d) explicitly prohibits public officials and employees from directly or indirectly soliciting or accepting any gift, favor, loan, or anything of monetary value in the course of their official duties. [You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.]
The Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (Republic Act No. 3019): This law penalizes the act of a public officer requesting or receiving any gift, present, or benefit in connection with government contracts or transactions. [You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now., You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.]
Presidential Decree No. 46: Issued in 1972, this decree makes it an offense for public officials to receive gifts—and for private individuals to give them—on any occasion, including Christmas

The gift was given before he became a PH Official (Senator) as a campaign fund. Wag 8080.
*prohibits public officials and employees from directly or indirectly soliciting or accepting any gift

*This law penalizes the act of a public officer requesting or receiving any gift,

*Presidential Decree No. 46: Issued in 1972, this decree makes it an offense for public officials to receive gifts—and for private individuals

Malinaw naman nakalagay sa research mo, hindi ka ba nagbabasa? 😭😭

The gift was given before he became a PH Official (Senator) as a campaign fund. Wag 8080.
*prohibits public officials and employees from directly or indirectly soliciting or accepting any gift

- Malinaw naman sa na research mo na bawal makatanggap ng anumang GIFT or pera ang isang politiko, kahit pa donasyon yan. Kahit pa hindi sya naging senador eh Politician na sya na-nagseserve sa gobyerno. member sya ng House of Representative at ng SAGIP Partylist.

ewan ko ba kung binabasa mo talaga yung research mo ng maayos, kailangan mo pa ba ng translation?😭😭
 
*prohibits public officials and employees from directly or indirectly soliciting or accepting any gift

*This law penalizes the act of a public officer requesting or receiving any gift,

*Presidential Decree No. 46: Issued in 1972, this decree makes it an offense for public officials to receive gifts—and for private individuals

Malinaw naman nakalagay sa research mo, hindi ka ba nagbabasa? 😭😭


*prohibits public officials and employees from directly or indirectly soliciting or accepting any gift

- Malinaw naman sa na research mo na bawal makatanggap ng anumang GIFT or pera ang isang politiko, kahit pa donasyon yan. Kahit pa hindi sya naging senador eh Politician na sya na-nagseserve sa gobyerno. member sya ng House of Representative at ng SAGIP Partylist.

ewan ko ba kung binabasa mo talaga yung research mo ng maayos, kailangan mo pa ba ng translation?😭😭
HINDI PA NGA SIYA SENADOR that time. 8080 talaga?

Edit: Binasa ko at inintindi ko. Ikaw, binasa mo lang at hindi inintindi or parehas kunwari binasa at tumagos lang?
 
Is Congressman not a public official? as far as i know he's a Congressman before he became a senator.
The law does not say, automatic plunder pag tumaggap ka. Kailangan mapatunayan/ or maestablish na ang tinanggap mo ay may kondisyon or kapalit against the law to call it bribe. Meron bang ganun? Magkaiba ang request sa recieved. Pag nag request ka ng fund, ibang usapan yun.
 
The law does not say, automatic plunder pag tumaggap ka. Kailangan mapatunayan/ or maestablish na ang tinanggap mo ay may kondisyon or kapalit against the law to call it bribe. Meron bang ganun? Magkaiba ang request sa recieved. Pag nag request ka ng fund, ibang usapan yun.

That's why he's being arrested, to bring it to the court to prove his innocence, hindi naman ibig sabihin na inaresto e guilty na. bibigyan siya ng chance to explain sa legal na paraan upang maipaliwanag yung kaso niya, tulad nga nung sinabi ng Assoc Justice ng Sandiganbayan to the public "Trust your Supreme Court".
 
That's why he's being arrested, to bring it to the court to prove his innocence, hindi naman ibig sabihin na inaresto e guilty na. bibigyan siya ng chance to explain sa legal na paraan upang maipaliwanag yung kaso niya, tulad nga nung sinabi ng Assoc Justice ng Sandiganbayan to the public "Trust your Supreme Court".
I agree with that. But the narrative of some here is merely convicted not innocent until proven guilty.
 
The law does not say, automatic plunder pag tumaggap ka. Kailangan mapatunayan/ or maestablish na ang tinanggap mo ay may kondisyon or kapalit against the law to call it bribe. Meron bang ganun? Magkaiba ang request sa recieved. Pag nag request ka ng fund, ibang usapan yun.
Sa ifinile na complaint, sabi PD 46

"WHEREAS, under existing laws and the civil service rules, it is prohibited to receive,
directly or indirectly, any gift, present or any other form of benefit in the course of official
duties;"


Ito ang kaso niyang nagcause ng plunder.

Tapos, sa RA 7080 sabi

"... acquires ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt or criminal acts"

Criminal act ba yung pagreceive niya ng gift? Under PD 46 pasok, kaya pasok sa ill-gotten wealth, kaya may kaso siyang plunder. Inamin niya rin naman na tinanggap niya as a gift noong Congressman siya. Ano ba pinaglalaban ng argumento mo?
 
Sa ifinile na complaint, sabi PD 46

"WHEREAS, under existing laws and the civil service rules, it is prohibited to receive,
directly or indirectly, any gift, present or any other form of benefit in the course of official
duties;"


Ito ang kaso niyang nagcause ng plunder.

Tapos, sa RA 7080 sabi

"... acquires ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt or criminal acts"

Criminal act ba yung pagreceive niya ng gift? Under PD 46 pasok, kaya pasok sa ill-gotten wealth, kaya may kaso siyang plunder. Inamin niya rin naman na tinanggap niya as a gift noong Congressman siya. Ano ba pinaglalaban ng argumento mo?
Abogado kaba? Ako hindi din. Ikaw anong pinaglalaban mo ba?
 
Abogado kaba? Ako hindi din. Ikaw anong pinaglalaban mo ba?
Na valid na makulong at makasuhan si Marcoleta? Na valid yung mga kaso sa kanya? Di mo kailangang maging abogado para umintindi ng batas. Sabi mo, "The law does not say, automatic plunder pag tumaggap ka, " malamang, alangan naman kakasuhan ka ng plunder kung wala kang koneksyon sa politics tapos tumanggap ka ng ₱75M sa random na kaibigan mo. Sabi mo rin dapat may kondisyon para matawag na bribe, basahin mo unang part ng PD 46. Congressman, tumanggap siya ng regalong pera na BY LAW bawal (basahin mo na lang yung PD 46, nasa taas kung marunong ka umintindi ng basic English). Kinasuhan siya ng plunder kasi BY LAW sa îllégâl galing yung ₱75M niya. Tatalunin mo na ata si Carlos Yulo kakabend ng naratibo
 
Na valid na makulong at makasuhan si Marcoleta? Na valid yung mga kaso sa kanya? Di mo kailangang maging abogado para umintindi ng batas. Sabi mo, "The law does not say, automatic plunder pag tumaggap ka, " malamang, alangan naman kakasuhan ka ng plunder kung wala kang koneksyon sa politics tapos tumanggap ka ng ₱75M sa random na kaibigan mo. Pero sa kaso ni Marcoleta, congressman siya, tumanggap siya ng regalong pera na BY LAW bawal (basahin mo na lang yung PD 46, nasa taas kung marunong ka umintindi ng basic English). Kinasuhan siya ng plunder kasi BY LAW sa îllégâl galing yung ₱75M niya. Tatalunin mo na ata si Carlos Yulo kakabend ng naratibo
Ibig sabihin kung anong pagkakaintindi mo ngayon sa batas na pinag uusapan will be the Final Verdict for Marcoleta Case?
 
Ibig sabihin kung anong pagkakaintindi mo ngayon sa batas na pinag uusapan will be the Final Verdict for Marcoleta Case?
O, di ba bending na naman? Tinanong mo kung ano pinaglalaban ko, opinion ko yun. Isipin mo ano mas valid, yung opinion ko na base sa batas o opinion mo galing sa mind bending? Sabi ko valid, wala ako sinabi na wala siya karapatan mag explain. Kinukuwestiyon mo yung bounds ng plunder case niya, clinarify ko kasi mali ka. Kakaumay mga DDS, alang substance.
 
O, di ba bending na naman? Tinanong mo kung ano pinaglalaban ko, opinion ko yun. Isipin mo ano mas valid, yung opinion ko na base sa batas o opinion mo galing sa mind bending? Sabi ko valid, wala ako sinabi na wala siya karapatan mag explain. Kinukuwestiyon mo yung bounds ng plunder case niya, clinarify ko kasi mali ka. Kakaumay mga DDS, alang substance.
Anong Bending ang sinasabi mo jan? Baka ikaw ang hindi nakaka intindi ng Batas.
Not all in prison are convicted.
Anong kaibahan ng Charged to Convicted?
 
Anong Bending ang sinasabi mo jan? Baka ikaw ang hindi nakaka intindi ng Batas.
Not all in prison are convicted.
Anong kaibahan ng Charged to Convicted?
E ano'ng pagkakaintindi mo sa "acquires ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt or criminal acts" at "WHEREAS, under existing laws and the civil service rules, it is prohibited to receive,
directly or indirectly, any gift, present or any other form of benefit in the course of official
duties;", at sinabi mo kanina na "The law does not say, automatic plunder pag tumaggap ka. Kailangan mapatunayan/ or maestablish na ang tinanggap mo ay may kondisyon or kapalit against the law to call it bribe"

Sino di nakakaintindi ng batas? Isa pa, umamin si Marcoleta na gift yun, di ba napakalakas na na case nun para masabing may nilabag siyang batas? Kaya nga finile in the first place
 
E ano'ng pagkakaintindi mo sa "acquires ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt or criminal acts" at "WHEREAS, under existing laws and the civil service rules, it is prohibited to receive,
directly or indirectly, any gift, present or any other form of benefit in the course of official
duties;", at sinabi mo kanina na "The law does not say, automatic plunder pag tumaggap ka. Kailangan mapatunayan/ or maestablish na ang tinanggap mo ay may kondisyon or kapalit against the law to call it bribe"

Sino di nakakaintindi ng batas? Isa pa, umamin si Marcoleta na gift yun, di ba napakalakas na na case nun para masabing may nilabag siyang batas? Kaya nga finile in the first place
That is the narrative of the accuser to support there claim.

Review the PD 46 na sinasabi mo.

A campaign fund is only treated as a legal "contribution" if it strictly satisfies the specific requirements of the Omnibus Election Code. If it fails to meet those requirements, the law reclassifies it as a prohibited gift

A gift is a gift as prohibited. Campaign Fund is a Legal "Contribution".
 

About this Thread

  • 432
    Replies
  • 4K
    Views
  • 16
    Participants
Last reply from:
rin_227

Trending Topics

Online now

Members online
1,049
Guests online
1,472
Total visitors
2,521

Forum statistics

Threads
2,285,335
Posts
29,029,416
Members
1,219,388
Latest member
rwenzwen0916
Back
Top