today we are watching the "CJ ON TRIAL" what do you think convict or acquit?

I hoped that this thug will never happen again. because I see it as a futile exercise. Politician are politicians and sometimes they are the epitome, in my opinion, of hypocrisy. But I decided to let the senate rule on this because it is what is said in the law and unless we change it, we are stuck with it. I will admit that they are some logic in the people who voted for conviction but it does deter the fact that it wasn't political in nature and with an wide audience, it could have been settled properly. The only thing that I regret is that some people wanted his head for the wrong reasons and without sounding too much of a broken record. I could have accepted the decision with 'mature' audience and balanced opinion. That said, perhaps, there is also injustice in all of this.

I stick to the law and law states that whatever the decision of those politicians will be, it will be implemented. So now, I have no say. I will have to accept the decision whether I like it or not. From what I've seen so far, those corrupt people are those that really win here. So soon when the time has come, I'm gonna take my family and pack away from here until a proper system is fully implemented.

Let me help by giving you a summary of what Santiago said: CJ Corona's SALN problem is not impeachable by law. But majority of the senate-judges voted that he is guilty just by not declaring correct accounts of his assests in his SALN so now he is to be stripped of his position but he is not a criminal until found guilty of committing a crime. Not putting certain assets in your SALN is not a criminal act. I just don't know if majority of those senators even know that one.

I am under the impression that Aquino is after Corona because it was he who fought for the Hacienda Luicita(--Did I spell that right?). Imagine the expanse of that land to be given to the common people without compensation--of course the Aquino and Cojuanco would want it back. The court have already seen, the land had been not distributed for decades already as it should have been years ago, so the compensation was not given. So, no compensation means the current president/relative in government will have to deal with the person responsible of such outcome, right?