Spoiler Alert!
If there's one thing that the opposition did right, it was to file that amended complaint.
With the apparent scenario mapped out by Secretary Defensor, et. al., they may have cast enough "reasonable doubt" (and I use this term very loosely) to take this charge out of the public's mind. MLQ3 even went so far as to say that this may provide the backdrop for Congress to dismiss the impeachment complaint(s).
But not if PCIJ has something to say about it. Secretary Defensor's defense (pun intended) wittingly or unwittingly attacked the PCIJ's credibility insofar as these tapes are concerned. But this stirred up to the proverbial hornet's nest. Of course, PCIJ is entitled to defend its credibility, by any and all means at its disposal. Even use Barry Dickey's report against itself.
So where are we at this point? (aka Spoiler Alert!)
1. If Secretary Defensor indeed submits this "newly discovered evidence" (again I use the term loosely given this blog lecture) to Congress, this should be a ground to conduct a hearing, NOT dismiss the complaint outright.
I personally think that the complaints are sufficient in form, that is, they allege impeachable offenses (never mind first if they are true or not). And with this Defensor defense and the answer ex abudante ad cautelam, I think the President has acknowledged that fact indeed. Dismissing the complaint at this point would be too "eager-beaver" and may trigger a "non-calculated" response.
2. Due process would naturally dictate giving a chance to the opposition to answer and/or refute the Barry Dickey findings. Here, the opposition has found a surprise ally in PCIJ.
3. But a hearing would result in a even longer, more drawn out process, which could just as well be the goal of the Defensor defense. This may be just the "delay" they need so the defense can regroup for the other impeachable allegations (like Juetengate and La Vista payola).
4. If this is the case, I have to take my hat off to them. The strategy would be very elaborate and may just work.
So what does the opposition need to do? (aka Spoiler Alert 2)
1. I say fight all the President's move at every turn and play their game, BUT
2. Play a little game of their own. (Here I think another bombshell and 79 signatures would do the trick...)
3. It's really a good thing they alleged other offenses in their complaint. At least if the Hello Garci issue is neutralized they still have other grounds...
Of course, a Senate trial (if at all in the offing) is another matter.
Oh, and by the way, I think the AFP should delay prosecuting Marlon Mendoza and instead focus on somebody we may have already forgotten because of this: the other "Garci," Maj. General Carlos Garcia...who we have not heard from in quite a while...
(Disclaimer: This is purely my opinion on the matter. If you see this scenario forming in the future, at least I can say I called it first...)
With the apparent scenario mapped out by Secretary Defensor, et. al., they may have cast enough "reasonable doubt" (and I use this term very loosely) to take this charge out of the public's mind. MLQ3 even went so far as to say that this may provide the backdrop for Congress to dismiss the impeachment complaint(s).
But not if PCIJ has something to say about it. Secretary Defensor's defense (pun intended) wittingly or unwittingly attacked the PCIJ's credibility insofar as these tapes are concerned. But this stirred up to the proverbial hornet's nest. Of course, PCIJ is entitled to defend its credibility, by any and all means at its disposal. Even use Barry Dickey's report against itself.
So where are we at this point? (aka Spoiler Alert!)
1. If Secretary Defensor indeed submits this "newly discovered evidence" (again I use the term loosely given this blog lecture) to Congress, this should be a ground to conduct a hearing, NOT dismiss the complaint outright.
I personally think that the complaints are sufficient in form, that is, they allege impeachable offenses (never mind first if they are true or not). And with this Defensor defense and the answer ex abudante ad cautelam, I think the President has acknowledged that fact indeed. Dismissing the complaint at this point would be too "eager-beaver" and may trigger a "non-calculated" response.
2. Due process would naturally dictate giving a chance to the opposition to answer and/or refute the Barry Dickey findings. Here, the opposition has found a surprise ally in PCIJ.
3. But a hearing would result in a even longer, more drawn out process, which could just as well be the goal of the Defensor defense. This may be just the "delay" they need so the defense can regroup for the other impeachable allegations (like Juetengate and La Vista payola).
4. If this is the case, I have to take my hat off to them. The strategy would be very elaborate and may just work.
So what does the opposition need to do? (aka Spoiler Alert 2)
1. I say fight all the President's move at every turn and play their game, BUT
2. Play a little game of their own. (Here I think another bombshell and 79 signatures would do the trick...)
3. It's really a good thing they alleged other offenses in their complaint. At least if the Hello Garci issue is neutralized they still have other grounds...
Of course, a Senate trial (if at all in the offing) is another matter.
Oh, and by the way, I think the AFP should delay prosecuting Marlon Mendoza and instead focus on somebody we may have already forgotten because of this: the other "Garci," Maj. General Carlos Garcia...who we have not heard from in quite a while...
(Disclaimer: This is purely my opinion on the matter. If you see this scenario forming in the future, at least I can say I called it first...)
transcription by Punzi @ 8:00 AM
2 Objection(s):
i agree with you punzi that that was the aim: to cast a reasonable doubt. unfortunately, i think it backfired. the experts were not credible and the tape used for dickey's examination was wrong. this only caused a reignition of the hello garci tapes. tactical error by mike d.
I have some great ideas :) Nevermind. Next time.
Post a Comment
<< Home