Sara Duterte’s defense collapses
The Cayetanos and Padilla may resort to using truncated logic to justify Sara’s death threats but it cannot destroy the record, the validated documents and the gravity of a gunman’s contract.

The Cayetanos and Padilla may resort to using truncated logic to justify Sara’s death threats but it cannot destroy the record, the validated documents and the gravity of a gunman’s contract.
Sara notoriously admitted that being truthful, honest and sincere is not needed in politics. This shows that she can never countenance the truth, would never accept facts and certainly would never admit issuing death threats against the Marcoses and her own ex-campaign manager, ex-Speaker Martin Romualdez, even after her own defense panel at the impeachment court confirmed it and tried to mindlessly justify it.
The murder of American marine biologist Dr. Kent Carpenter, 73, is a chilling reminder that “tokhang” culture continues even as Rodrigo “Digong” Duterte is tucked away at the Scheveningen Prison in The Hague.
It is fairly easy to be civilized. Remember the admonition of Socrates: Those who lose arguments resort to slander.
Sara’s statements should be taken as proof that she does not believe in her own declarations, has contempt for the truth, and has no truck with sincerity, honesty and morality. They prove that Sara swims in Duterte’s DNA.
Day Four ultimately revealed two parallel trials. The first may occupy lawyers. The second will define history. One was fought over typographical mistakes, documentary lapses, and procedural skirmishes. The other—far more consequential—asks whether the Republic can tolerate a public official invoking political assassination and still claim to embody the constitutional standards of honor, integrity, and public trust.
China is using bogus geology, bogus astronomy and bogus maps to mythologize China’s imperial ambitions and promote uncivilized discourse, perhaps thinking that arrogant, condescending behavior can bamboozle Filipinos into yielding on such a serious issue as large-scale landgrabbing.
The impeachment trial occupies a singular place in constitutional government. Unlike a criminal trial, it is not confined to determining whether a penal law has been violated. It asks whether the conduct of a public official remains compatible with the extraordinary trust the people have vested in that office.
Plagiarism has become a vice for Sara, whose capacity for original thinking is scant and whose dependence on her platoons of consultants compromises her ability to lead government.
Vice President Sara Duterte’s chief legal counsel Sheila Sison’s opening statement only hews closely to the general character of Sara’s legal theory, which is to deny everything, refuse to debunk allegations and accuse complainants of trying to besmirch her reputation, as if she has any.



