Apo Marcos : Facts And Myths

[rooster69ph]

Hoy robbie huwag kang magpaikot ...projecting wont get you anywhere of your dumb opinion.

 

Rubbish. Gumamit ka ng sentido kumon

 

Wag kang mamilosopo dahil alam natin parepareho na karapatan yan ng isang convicted sa batas na mag file ng MFR kaya nga ang sabi ng sandigan imelda convicted ka pero bibigyan kita ng 30 araw mag file ng apela. Kung di siya mag file then magiging final na yun. The same way kung mag file siya at motion denied pwede then siya pumunta sa SC.

 

Pero iisa lang naman ang isyu dito kung namatay si meldy magnanakaw na di pa sinasabi ng SC na ay nagkamali ang sandigan sa kanyang conviction namatay ba siya ng walang record? Sa record ng sandigan cinvicted pa rin si meldy mandarambong. The only fact here is that she died without being acquitted by the SC of her conviction

 

Nakakatawa ang mga loyalista

Ano na yun pinagsasabing walang na convict na marcos?

Nabubuhay sa pagkahibang pa rin

 

So sa ngayon hintay muna kayo magkatotoo na magkaroon ng acquittal from SC saka mo sabihin its a fact that she will die of no guilty record.

[will robie]

Haha! The yellowtard trying lamely to spin its post. You already shot yourself in the foot. Stop ranting convoluted nonsense. Hahaha! How am i projecting exactly? Stating a fact and totally vitiating what you posted is not projecting. Before using a word, make sure you know what it means. Hahaha!

Edited November 13, 2018 by will robie

[camiar]

Rooster,

 

An accused person who has the influence and means can always appeal the court's decision. If their lawyers are good at it, the case can be delayed indefinitely until the case is no longer relevant to the accused or to the court, paving its way to be reconsidered, revised, reversed, or be confirmed and executed --- by which time, as I said, it would be no longer be relevant.

 

It is relatively easier for Imelda's case because of her advanced age.

 

This is a fact of life in our country that you can't seem to wrap your mind around.

 

Just watch and learn.

Edited November 13, 2018 by camiar

[rooster69ph]

Lets keep this simple...

 

Fact:meldy was convicted

 

Myth: despite the conviction Meldy and SC not deciding on the matter she will die not having a guilty verdict on record.

 

Yeah...let us all watch and learn how these pakawalang loyalista ng mga magnanakaw try to revise history/facts.

[will robie]

I pity the yellow disciple who can’t accept the fact that the conviction is not yet final and executory. Don’t hold your breath, yellowtard. Haha!

[rooster69ph]

I pity the yellow disciple who cant accept the fact that the conviction is not yet final and executory. Dont hold your breath, yellowtard. Haha!

On the contrary i find it pathetic kung anu ano ang gusto mong palabasin.

 

Dati pag sinabing magnanakaw ang mga marcos ang yabang kung humirit ng loyalista ng mandarambong ... walang pang ni isang marcos ang na convict. Now nagkukubli na sa ... hindi pa final and executory ang conviction. Hahaha

 

I bet you cant/will refuse to answer the question below that will expose with finality your shitty arguments/opinions on this matter

 

 

Fact:may conviction na yun nga lang di pa ito final and executory dahil may legal remedies pa siya.

 

Tanong: Does it mean that since hindi pa ito final and executory eh sa mata ng sandiganbayan at sa batas eh malinis pa rin (not guilty) si imelda marcos specially if walang sinasabi pa ang SC na nagkamali ang sandigan sa kaniyang hatol at binabaligtad ang conviction?

Edited November 13, 2018 by rooster69ph

[jc44 - RETIRED]

Rooster,

 

An accused person who has the influence and means can always appeal the court's decision. If their lawyers are good at it, the case can be delayed indefinitely until the case is no longer relevant to the accused or to the court, paving its way to be reconsidered, revised, reversed, or be confirmed and executed --- by which time, as I said, it would be no longer be relevant.

 

It is relatively easier for Imelda's case because of her advanced age.

 

This is a fact of life in our country that you can't seem to wrap your mind around.

 

Just watch and learn.

 

Haven't heard of any jurisprudence where the convicted died during the pendency of an appeal, the appellate court continued to hear the appeal to determine criminal cuplpability and subsequently acquit the convicted. Death extinguishes the criminal liability, and renders the appeal moot and academic. So if Imelda dies during the pendency of her appeal, the conviction stands, even if she is never imprisoned.

 

But hey if you could provide a case that says otherwise, that would be great.

 

Not sure why the fixation is on whether or not Imelda will be jailed. I'm confident she won't, not with a police chief completely subservient to the Marcoses. Mas importante yung conviction. And sure, it isn't final and executory. But it's a step closer to a definitive legal and historical answer to the question that persists among the pro-Marcos: are the Marcoses guilty or not?

[tk421]

Well well well... bail has been forfeited and an arrest warrant has been ordered. Mug shot na!

 

Advanced age my ess. 79yo na nag shop lift kinukulong nga, eh. What a pathetic excuse.

 

The only reason she won't be jailed is that if this admin doesn't have the political will to follow the court's orders.

Edited November 13, 2018 by tk421

[will robie]

On the contrary i find it pathetic kung anu ano ang gusto mong palabasin.

How are exposing your utter ignorance and completely discrediting your post pathetic? You got mortified. Accept it.

Edited November 13, 2018 by will robie

[will robie]

Dati pag sinabing magnanakaw ang mga marcos ang yabang kung humirit ng loyalista ng mandarambong ... walang pang ni isang marcos ang na convict. Now nagkukubli na sa ... hindi pa final and executory ang conviction. Hahaha

Again, the verdict is not yet final and executory. Yes, mayabang pa din kami kasi hindi pa din final and executory. Reserve your celebration when the verdict is final and executory and the former first lady is put behind bars. I doubt though that it will happen. Haha!

[will robie]

I bet you cant/will refuse to answer the question below that will expose with finality your shitty arguments/opinions on this matter

 

 

Fact:may conviction na yun nga lang di pa ito final and executory dahil may legal remedies pa siya.

 

Tanong: Does it mean that since hindi pa ito final and executory eh sa mata ng sandiganbayan at sa batas eh malinis pa rin (not guilty) si imelda marcos specially if walang sinasabi pa ang SC na nagkamali ang sandigan sa kaniyang hatol at binabaligtad ang conviction?

Fact: the verdict is not yet final and executory. Cry and accept it.

 

Shitty arguments because you said so? Haha!

 

But let me try to rephrase what you said : Does it mean that since the decision is not yet final and executory, in the eyes of the Sandigan and the law, Imelda is clean (not guilty), especially if the SC still has not decided that the Sandigan erred in its verdict and reversed the verdict?

 

Answer: It does not matter what the Sandigan thinks because it is not yet final and executory because in the greater scheme of things, it is the final decision of the court that will decide the case with finality that matters.

 

You're asking my opinion, I gave it and I bet the best you can do is say that it is a shitty opinion again simply because you can't discredit it thoroughly.

Edited November 13, 2018 by will robie

[will robie]

 

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1053014/suarez-on-imeldas-conviction-dont-make-it-a-big-issue

 

 

 

Placing Ilocos Norte Rep. Imelda Marcos behind bars following her conviction for graft will not do the country any good, House Deputy Minority Leader Danilo Suarez claimed.

 

Fomenting criticisms, the Quezon representative on Monday said the proposal to exempt the widow of the late strongman Ferdinand Marcos from serving the 77-year jail term handed down by the Sandiganbayan “sound very reasonable considering that (she’s) already 88 years old.”

“For us to have closure, don’t make this a big issue. If you have her arrested, the issue will only become bigger,” Suarez told reporters.

 

“The critics of the late (dictator) have done nothing but look for the wrong that he had done. How about the good things they had done? Nobody is giving credit for the good they had done,” he said.

“I think if we’re going to dig up the past, we’re not going to move on,” he stressed. “My position is that we leave it that way. Let’s stop making it an issue. I hope we have a closure on this.”

Reminded that Marcos was found guilty of transferring $200 million in unexplained wealth to seven Swiss accounts, Suarez claimed there was no evidence that the money came from the state coffers.

“Give me one case wherein you can accuse the (Marcos) family of stealing money from the government. Name me one case,” he said.

The House minority leader said Marcos’ conviction for graft involved “unexplained wealth, but not (funds) coming from the purse of the government.”

As if courting uproar from martial law survivors, Suarez said: “Remember, if you work back in time, why were the critics (of Marcos) very angry? It’s because they are communists in the first place.”

“They were the enemies of the state,” he added.

To the yellow trolls, you may want to debunk Suarez.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 13, 2018 by will robie

[rooster69ph]

I bet you cant/will refuse to answer the question below that will expose with finality your shitty arguments/opinions on this matter

Fact:may conviction na yun nga lang di pa ito final and executory dahil may legal remedies pa siya.

Tanong: Does it mean that since hindi pa ito final and executory eh sa mata ng sandiganbayan at sa batas eh malinis pa rin (not guilty) si imelda marcos specially if walang sinasabi pa ang SC na nagkamali ang sandigan sa kaniyang hatol at binabaligtad ang conviction?

Fact: the verdict is not yet final and executory. Cry and accept it.

 

Shitty arguments because you said so? Haha!

 

But let me try to rephrase what you said : Does it mean that since the decision is not yet final and executory, in the eyes of the Sandigan and the law, Imelda is clean (not guilty), especially if the SC still has not decided that the Sandigan erred in its verdict and reversed the verdict?

 

Answer: It does not matter what the Sandigan thinks because it is not yet final and executory because in the greater scheme of things, it is the final decision of the court that will decide the case with finality that matters.

 

You're asking my opinion, I gave it and I bet the best you can do is say that it is a shitty opinion again simply because you can't discredit it thoroughly.

as expected ... di mo nga masagot yun tanong ko. hahaha pwned!

 

i rest my case ...

[will robie]

as expected ... di mo nga masagot yun tanong ko. hahaha pwned!

i rest my case ...

It is not my fault if my answer is beyond your comprehension.

 

Pwned? Stop projecting. It is clear as day you are.

[camiar]

 

Haven't heard of any jurisprudence where the convicted died during the pendency of an appeal, the appellate court continued to hear the appeal to determine criminal cuplpability and subsequently acquit the convicted. Death extinguishes the criminal liability, and renders the appeal moot and academic. So if Imelda dies during the pendency of her appeal, the conviction stands, even if she is never imprisoned.

 

But hey if you could provide a case that says otherwise, that would be great.

 

Not sure why the fixation is on whether or not Imelda will be jailed. I'm confident she won't, not with a police chief completely subservient to the Marcoses. Mas importante yung conviction. And sure, it isn't final and executory. But it's a step closer to a definitive legal and historical answer to the question that persists among the pro-Marcos: are the Marcoses guilty or not?

 

Guilty of what? Graft -- technically, yes.

 

Stealing money from government coffers, maybe not.

 

Marcos' political opposition will use this much delayed verdict to vilify the Marcos candidates in the next election.

 

The Marcoses on the other hand, will need time to enlighten the voting public about the differences between the graft case that Mrs. Marcos was found guilty of illegally forming and maintaining corporations in Switzerland where they earned US$ 200 million from interests and investments, and the remaining fact that it has never been proven that Mrs. Marcos stole this money from the people.

 

The lawyers will be tasked give the Marcoses the time they need to explain their side to the court of public opinion.

 

Anti-Marcos politicians know that time is not on their side.

[rooster69ph]

Have you and your fellow loyalist ask yourselves how the marcoses legally amass their wealth.

[daphne loves derby]

[daphne loves derby]

Eto na... Eto naa... Eto naaaa.... wahhhhh

 

Imelda cites poor health for absence at graft case promulgation
Read more at https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/11/15/1868853/imelda-cites-poor-health-absence-graft-case-promulgation#dTCQgWtSWSg0rvzi.99

 

In her motion filed before the Sandiganbayan, the graft convict claimed she was “suffering from multiple organ infirmities."

May sakit pala ha? pero naka pag party?

 

CLASSIC!!!

 

 

Edited November 15, 2018 by daphne loves derby

[jc44 - RETIRED]

 

Guilty of what? Graft -- technically, yes.

 

Stealing money from government coffers, maybe not.

 

Marcos' political opposition will use this much delayed verdict to vilify the Marcos candidates in the next election.

 

The Marcoses on the other hand, will need time to enlighten the voting public about the differences between the graft case that Mrs. Marcos was found guilty of illegally forming and maintaining corporations in Switzerland where they earned US$ 200 million from interests and investments, and the remaining fact that it has never been proven that Mrs. Marcos stole this money from the people.

 

The lawyers will be tasked give the Marcoses the time they need to explain their side to the court of public opinion.

 

Anti-Marcos politicians know that time is not on their side.

 

Thanks for not responding to any of the other points I raised, as it means you have no answer.

 

To illustrate a point: There is no dispute that Al Capone is one of the most brutal mob bosses to emerge from the period of the American Prohibition, being involved in numerous illegal activities including smuggling, extortion, bribery, and ordering and committing murders.

 

Was he ever convicted for any of those crimes for which he is widely known, and which no sane person would challenge as untrue?

 

None.

 

Except for tax evasion. And yet "tax evader" is hardly Al Capone's primary reputation

 

I mentioned this before, and I'll mention it again, because people keep falling for this trap: there are court decisions, and then there is history. In the long run, it is history that will be the judge - even of court decisions. The insistence of "well this is all that the court decision says" is ultimately a squirreling tactic.

[camiar]

 

Thanks for not responding to any of the other points I raised, as it means you have no answer.

 

To illustrate a point: There is no dispute that Al Capone is one of the most brutal mob bosses to emerge from the period of the American Prohibition, being involved in numerous illegal activities including smuggling, extortion, bribery, and ordering and committing murders.

 

Was he ever convicted for any of those crimes for which he is widely known, and which no sane person would challenge as untrue?

 

None.

 

Except for tax evasion. And yet "tax evader" is hardly Al Capone's primary reputation

 

I mentioned this before, and I'll mention it again, because people keep falling for this trap: there are court decisions, and then there is history. In the long run, it is history that will be the judge - even of court decisions. The insistence of "well this is all that the court decision says" is ultimately a squirreling tactic.

Al Capone is a mobster who was sent to jail by the Feds not for the mob crimes he committed but for not paying his taxes.

 

Mrs. Marcos is the wife of a Philippine president who was found guilty of graft because while she is still holding a government position, she created a company in Switzerland so she can invest her money.

 

I don't see your point, unless you meant that the Sandigan is on a witch hunt with the intention of getting Mrs. Marcos to be convicted of any crime so she can be jailed.

Edited November 15, 2018 by camiar

[Sam1226]

nagkakasakit na, ihanda na ang wheelchair!!!

[rooster69ph]

meldy was indisposed not because she was sick but because she had to party that night.

 

hahaha...the marcoses are not only thieves, they are f#&king liars as well. sabagay may kasabihan nga na ang sinungaling ay kapatid ng magnanakaw.

 

kaya hindi na rin ako magtataka na yun mga umiidolo at loyalista sa mga ito ay ganito rin dahil ito ang kanilang kinagisnan at sa kanila normal lang yan.

Edited November 15, 2018 by rooster69ph

[jc44 - RETIRED]

Al Capone is a mobster who was sent to jail by the Feds not for the mob crimes he committed but for not paying his taxes.

 

Mrs. Marcos is the wife of a Philippine president who was found guilty of graft because while she is still holding a government position, she created a company in Switzerland so she can invest her money.

 

I don't see your point, unless you meant that the Sandigan is on a witch hunt with the intention of getting Mrs. Marcos to be convicted of any crime so she can be jailed.

 

Didn't think you would see the point. Can't help you there chum. There are none so blind as those unwilling to see.

meldy was indisposed not because she was sick but because she had to party that night.

 

hahaha...the marcoses are not only thieves, they are f#&king liars as well. sabagay may kasabihan nga na ang sinungaling ay kapatid ng magnanakaw.

 

kaya hindi na rin ako magtataka na yun mga umiidolo at loyalista sa mga ito ay ganito rin dahil ito ang kanilang kinagisnan at sa kanila normal lang yan.

 

"Thieving is lyf, but partying is lyfer" - the Marcoses, probably LOL

[will robie]

The yellow trolls are probably livid that Madame Meldy was granted bail.

Edited November 16, 2018 by will robie

[juan t]

Al Capone is a mobster who was sent to jail by the Feds not for the mob crimes he committed but for not paying his taxes.

 

Mrs. Marcos is the wife of a Philippine president who was found guilty of graft because while she is still holding a government position, she created a company in Switzerland so she can invest her money.

 

I don't see your point, unless you meant that the Sandigan is on a witch hunt with the intention of getting Mrs. Marcos to be convicted of any crime so she can be jailed.

 

 

Sinong niloloko mo? Everybody knows Swiss accounts (known for their secrecy) are the favorite venue for crooks to hide their money and not, as you claim, for investment purposes.