正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Remember his iconic statement by Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano from the CJ Corona impeachment trial? “If your client cannot explain, I cannot abstain. If you did not disclose, we have to depose. If you are not fit, you should not sit as the CJ of our Supreme Court.” Cayetano...

imtheatan's profile picture

Thea Tan

4,247 subscribers

172,453 次观看 • 8 天前 •via X (Twitter)

新闻政治
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

In 2001, the impeachment court made a fatal mistake: they voted *not to open the "second envelope"* containing former President Joseph Estrada’s secret bank records. The public immediately lost faith in the impeachment trial. People took to the streets, and Erap’s presidency fell. Today, if the impeachment court denies the subpoena for Vice President Sara Duterte’s financial records, that would be similar to not opening the second envelope in 2001. Do we demand transparency, or do we allow technicalities to hide the truth? Suppressing these bank and tax records will turn this impeachment trial into a sham. The impeachment court MUST issue the subpoena. We cannot let history repeat itself. ——- Video: throwback video from 2001.
0:38

In 2001, the impeachment court made a fatal mistake: they voted *not to open the "second envelope"* containing former President Joseph Estrada’s secret bank records. The public immediately lost faith in the impeachment trial. People took to the streets, and Erap’s presidency fell. Today, if the impeachment court denies the subpoena for Vice President Sara Duterte’s financial records, that would be similar to not opening the second envelope in 2001. Do we demand transparency, or do we allow technicalities to hide the truth? Suppressing these bank and tax records will turn this impeachment trial into a sham. The impeachment court MUST issue the subpoena. We cannot let history repeat itself. ——- Video: throwback video from 2001.

Thea Tan

51,582 次观看 • 8 天前

“THE PRESIDENT HAS FINAL SAY” How to legally access VP Sara Duterte’s tax records for the impeachment trial? Former BIR Commissioner Kim Henares shares how it was made accessible during the late CJ Renato Corona’s time. 1. Impeachment court issued subpoena for Henares to bring tax records to senate 2. Henares writes to President Aquino, saying she receives subpoena to bring tax records 3. PNOY then grants approval to disclose Corona’s tax records under Sec 72 of Natl Revenue Code of 1997 Henares says the impeachment court does not supersede this law. If a BIR officer discloses an individual’s tax records, they can be put in jail. For Henares, once the impeachment court issues the subpoena to the BIR, PBBM can then order the disclosure. ABS-CBN News Channel ABS-CBN News
2:03

“THE PRESIDENT HAS FINAL SAY” How to legally access VP Sara Duterte’s tax records for the impeachment trial? Former BIR Commissioner Kim Henares shares how it was made accessible during the late CJ Renato Corona’s time. 1. Impeachment court issued subpoena for Henares to bring tax records to senate 2. Henares writes to President Aquino, saying she receives subpoena to bring tax records 3. PNOY then grants approval to disclose Corona’s tax records under Sec 72 of Natl Revenue Code of 1997 Henares says the impeachment court does not supersede this law. If a BIR officer discloses an individual’s tax records, they can be put in jail. For Henares, once the impeachment court issues the subpoena to the BIR, PBBM can then order the disclosure. ABS-CBN News Channel ABS-CBN News

Karen Davila

99,787 次观看 • 8 天前

‘KAILANGAN MAKITA NG PUBLIKO AT SENATOR-JUDGES ANG TUNAY NA KULAY NG BISE PRESIDENTE’ WATCH: House prosecutor Chel Diokno defends the request to subpoena Vice President Sara Duterte’s bank and tax records, including those from when she was Davao City mayor and vice mayor, saying these are directly relevant to determining her fitness—or unfitness—to serve as Vice President, an impeachable position. “From 2007 to 2013, ayon sa records ng AMLC, lumampas sa P3 billion ang kanyang financial activity,” Diokno said, adding that the question is whether Duterte betrayed public trust and violated the Constitution by amassing unexplained wealth. Diokno also noted that the financial records of the late former Chief Justice Renato Corona, including those from before he became the country’s top magistrate, were examined during his impeachment trial. | Eimor Santos
4:25

‘KAILANGAN MAKITA NG PUBLIKO AT SENATOR-JUDGES ANG TUNAY NA KULAY NG BISE PRESIDENTE’ WATCH: House prosecutor Chel Diokno defends the request to subpoena Vice President Sara Duterte’s bank and tax records, including those from when she was Davao City mayor and vice mayor, saying these are directly relevant to determining her fitness—or unfitness—to serve as Vice President, an impeachable position. “From 2007 to 2013, ayon sa records ng AMLC, lumampas sa P3 billion ang kanyang financial activity,” Diokno said, adding that the question is whether Duterte betrayed public trust and violated the Constitution by amassing unexplained wealth. Diokno also noted that the financial records of the late former Chief Justice Renato Corona, including those from before he became the country’s top magistrate, were examined during his impeachment trial. | Eimor Santos

NewsWatch Plus PH

23,686 次观看 • 9 天前

The Senate has gone deaf — they only hear Sara Zimmerman Duterte In a supposed “compromise”, Senate Minority Leader Tito Sotto suggested that they move the discussion of the impeachment trial of Sara Zimmerman Duterte to give them time to study the 97-page Supreme Court ruling. But if the Senate Pro Tempore is correct — it seems as though this was the plan all along, to look for any reason to kill the impeachment without a trial. I can say without a shadow of a doubt that the Supreme Court ruling was based on erroneous fact — it doesn’t need the most brilliant of minds to say, all you need to do is to watch the February 5 plenary session of the House of Representatives. The roster of Senators is hopeless. I do not think they will research further as I think they have been waiting for this all along — an out. I don’t think they will defend the constitution in any way. But the truth is, the livestream alone can single handedly debunk the claim of the Supreme Court ruling that the House did not act on the other three impeachment complaints. [44:00] timestamp of the livestream would tell you that the Secretary General referred all the four impeachment complaints to the plenary. Not only that, if you watch the livestream of the House of Representatives —- you will also see for yourself that the following claims of the Supreme Court based its ruling on erroneous fact despite the submission of the House of its journal (the equivalent of minutes of meeting): 1. There was a motion in plenary to transmit the Articles of Impeachment and the body voted to approve this motion 2. There was a motion to elect members of the public prosecutors and the body voted to approve this motion. 3. There was a motion to archive the three other impeachment complaints filed on December 2, 3 and 19, 2024 and the body voted to approve this motion. So, if you are wondering why legal minds and luminaries raise questions and concerns about this Supreme court ruling — because common sense dictates it is wrong to draw your conclusion siding with news reports, version official records and one very clear video of the proceedings. So… please tell me how the public will not question this Supreme Court decision? Will the Senators finally listen? I am not holding my breath.
8:48

The Senate has gone deaf — they only hear Sara Zimmerman Duterte In a supposed “compromise”, Senate Minority Leader Tito Sotto suggested that they move the discussion of the impeachment trial of Sara Zimmerman Duterte to give them time to study the 97-page Supreme Court ruling. But if the Senate Pro Tempore is correct — it seems as though this was the plan all along, to look for any reason to kill the impeachment without a trial. I can say without a shadow of a doubt that the Supreme Court ruling was based on erroneous fact — it doesn’t need the most brilliant of minds to say, all you need to do is to watch the February 5 plenary session of the House of Representatives. The roster of Senators is hopeless. I do not think they will research further as I think they have been waiting for this all along — an out. I don’t think they will defend the constitution in any way. But the truth is, the livestream alone can single handedly debunk the claim of the Supreme Court ruling that the House did not act on the other three impeachment complaints. [44:00] timestamp of the livestream would tell you that the Secretary General referred all the four impeachment complaints to the plenary. Not only that, if you watch the livestream of the House of Representatives —- you will also see for yourself that the following claims of the Supreme Court based its ruling on erroneous fact despite the submission of the House of its journal (the equivalent of minutes of meeting): 1. There was a motion in plenary to transmit the Articles of Impeachment and the body voted to approve this motion 2. There was a motion to elect members of the public prosecutors and the body voted to approve this motion. 3. There was a motion to archive the three other impeachment complaints filed on December 2, 3 and 19, 2024 and the body voted to approve this motion. So, if you are wondering why legal minds and luminaries raise questions and concerns about this Supreme court ruling — because common sense dictates it is wrong to draw your conclusion siding with news reports, version official records and one very clear video of the proceedings. So… please tell me how the public will not question this Supreme Court decision? Will the Senators finally listen? I am not holding my breath.

Just

21,496 次观看 • 11 个月前

Nnamdi Kanu is trending because his trial has been adjourned indefinitely. Barely 48hrs after he said no one should beg Tinubu, on his behalf. Because agitating Biafra is not a crime. He rejected the adjournment by Justice Binta Nyako. Lectured the court, alleged Nyako wants to exchange his head. September 24th, 2024, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu rejected and openly accused Justice Binta Nyako of being an unprofessional, bias Justice who actively disobeys the rule of law. Then asked her to remove herself from his trial. She admitted and transferred his case file to Justice Tosho. Justice Tosho rejected it and sent it back to Justice Nyako. MNK insisted he isn’t confident in Justice Nyako handling his case. That, if there is no one willing to handle his case in Abuja. Then, his trial should be moved to the South East. Since his alleged offense of “Treason” affects the South East, not the North. Then, they should be well equipped to handle the trial accordingly. Today in court, Justice Nyako appeared again and was ready to proceed with the case at the Federal High Court Abuja. As prosecution was looking to begin, MNK’s lawyer opposed, saying they are not here for trial. Justice Nyako then said, she initially recused herself from the case, but she was assigned back by the Chief Judge. That, they’d need to file a reassignment motion. As Kanu’s lawyers and the prosecution were arguing the need for such. Nnamdi Kanu demanded to speak. He said, he’s only in court out of respect. That, Nyako no longer has jurisdiction over his case. And he doesn’t understand why they always turn the law upside down when it comes to his case. He argued that, since Nyako had officially recused herself from his case. Then, the Chief Judge can’t impose, instead appeal. Kanu insisted Nyako is unprofessional and bias. Kanu said “If the Chief Judge disagrees, he should appeal the decision. You cannot preside over this case, not now, not today, not ever. You stand recused and you must leave my case. I don’t need you in my case. You are biased. Tell the Chief Judge that Nnamdi Kanu said so. This is not a court of law. This is a shrine to injustice and i will not subject myself to it”. After his submission, the prosecutor still wanted the court to go ahead with trial. MNK interrupted saying “Because of money they are paying you from the AGF’s office, a grown-up man like you is here supporting evil. The rule of law says you should go on appeal. The same Chief Judge, writing this stupid memo, I have recused him before. He sat on appeal, I took him to NJC and recused him. Why is he insisting on this one? He wants to embarrass your lordship by asking her to sit on this case.” Then Justice Nyako, decided Adjourn the case indefinitely due to the situation of things. Kanu again; “You have no jurisdiction to adjourn anything. None whatsoever. You cannot make an order without jurisdiction. The memo from the Chief Judge cannot confer jurisdiction upon you” Kanu insists they deliberately ignore the law due to their bias against him. That him agitating for Biafra is his right, that somehow they’ve changed his charge from treason to terrorism. He remains defiant, against Justice Nyako handling his trial. He alleged that Justice Nyako has reached some sort of agreement to give his head in exchange for the freedom of her husband and son, who are facing a criminal case. Hinting that Nyako never truely left the case. Basically, he just wants the court to obey the Nigerian constitution. He has been in detention since 2021. But Nigerians fear it has become political and he may need to be submissive, otherwise his pride will keep him incarcerated indefinitely. • Pay for what you use. Get detailed analytics on your energy consumption • water, electricity & gas. Inquire now: Vendr Utilities || iOS • Web • Android || info@vendr.ng ||
9:20

Nnamdi Kanu is trending because his trial has been adjourned indefinitely. Barely 48hrs after he said no one should beg Tinubu, on his behalf. Because agitating Biafra is not a crime. He rejected the adjournment by Justice Binta Nyako. Lectured the court, alleged Nyako wants to exchange his head. September 24th, 2024, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu rejected and openly accused Justice Binta Nyako of being an unprofessional, bias Justice who actively disobeys the rule of law. Then asked her to remove herself from his trial. She admitted and transferred his case file to Justice Tosho. Justice Tosho rejected it and sent it back to Justice Nyako. MNK insisted he isn’t confident in Justice Nyako handling his case. That, if there is no one willing to handle his case in Abuja. Then, his trial should be moved to the South East. Since his alleged offense of “Treason” affects the South East, not the North. Then, they should be well equipped to handle the trial accordingly. Today in court, Justice Nyako appeared again and was ready to proceed with the case at the Federal High Court Abuja. As prosecution was looking to begin, MNK’s lawyer opposed, saying they are not here for trial. Justice Nyako then said, she initially recused herself from the case, but she was assigned back by the Chief Judge. That, they’d need to file a reassignment motion. As Kanu’s lawyers and the prosecution were arguing the need for such. Nnamdi Kanu demanded to speak. He said, he’s only in court out of respect. That, Nyako no longer has jurisdiction over his case. And he doesn’t understand why they always turn the law upside down when it comes to his case. He argued that, since Nyako had officially recused herself from his case. Then, the Chief Judge can’t impose, instead appeal. Kanu insisted Nyako is unprofessional and bias. Kanu said “If the Chief Judge disagrees, he should appeal the decision. You cannot preside over this case, not now, not today, not ever. You stand recused and you must leave my case. I don’t need you in my case. You are biased. Tell the Chief Judge that Nnamdi Kanu said so. This is not a court of law. This is a shrine to injustice and i will not subject myself to it”. After his submission, the prosecutor still wanted the court to go ahead with trial. MNK interrupted saying “Because of money they are paying you from the AGF’s office, a grown-up man like you is here supporting evil. The rule of law says you should go on appeal. The same Chief Judge, writing this stupid memo, I have recused him before. He sat on appeal, I took him to NJC and recused him. Why is he insisting on this one? He wants to embarrass your lordship by asking her to sit on this case.” Then Justice Nyako, decided Adjourn the case indefinitely due to the situation of things. Kanu again; “You have no jurisdiction to adjourn anything. None whatsoever. You cannot make an order without jurisdiction. The memo from the Chief Judge cannot confer jurisdiction upon you” Kanu insists they deliberately ignore the law due to their bias against him. That him agitating for Biafra is his right, that somehow they’ve changed his charge from treason to terrorism. He remains defiant, against Justice Nyako handling his trial. He alleged that Justice Nyako has reached some sort of agreement to give his head in exchange for the freedom of her husband and son, who are facing a criminal case. Hinting that Nyako never truely left the case. Basically, he just wants the court to obey the Nigerian constitution. He has been in detention since 2021. But Nigerians fear it has become political and he may need to be submissive, otherwise his pride will keep him incarcerated indefinitely. • Pay for what you use. Get detailed analytics on your energy consumption • water, electricity & gas. Inquire now: Vendr Utilities || iOS • Web • Android || [email protected] ||

Trending Explained

103,162 次观看 • 1 年前

Senator Joel Villanueva, the master of double talk I once voted for Villanueva. I was a first time voter and he’s the young legislator running for Senate for the first time — to my disappointment, he turned out worse than the people we tried to replace with the supposed new blood. Following the Senate over the years, you will notice how he mastered the art of double talk. He will talk all these nonsense, only to vote Last Tuesday, this was evident. He said he agrees with the minority leader but concluded his statement with the exact opposite point. I invite you to watch the Senate plenary last Tuesday, you will see what I win. Ugh! Annoying! Beyond annoying. I cannot blame Senator Risa Hontiveros for saying that Dela Rosa-Cayetano motion was planned and with the Joel Villanueva viral videos… is it safe to say that he’s not just a part of it but might also be one of the masterminds? Why is he protecting Sara Duterte? Joel Villanueva is not making sense at all with all his excuses! The videos are clear! They didn’t ask him for procedural concerns, he was directing Imee Marcos. Lols! Also, there’s the other video of Robin Padilla saying “Hindi naman yan ang napag-usapan natin”. Ano ba ang napag-usapan? Remember how he buried the SOGIE bill as the majority leader? He started his speech by saying that he has a lot of LGBTQIA+ friends, he even dared to say that he has the utmost respect and love for them. Then, he moved to refer the bill to his committee after allegedly soliciting for letters from religious groups. Remember how he belittled the partylist representatives, as if that’s not what he started? Lols. Joel Villanueva turned out to be so much worse than the politician we despised in the past. Video: Bilyonaryo
3:07

Senator Joel Villanueva, the master of double talk I once voted for Villanueva. I was a first time voter and he’s the young legislator running for Senate for the first time — to my disappointment, he turned out worse than the people we tried to replace with the supposed new blood. Following the Senate over the years, you will notice how he mastered the art of double talk. He will talk all these nonsense, only to vote Last Tuesday, this was evident. He said he agrees with the minority leader but concluded his statement with the exact opposite point. I invite you to watch the Senate plenary last Tuesday, you will see what I win. Ugh! Annoying! Beyond annoying. I cannot blame Senator Risa Hontiveros for saying that Dela Rosa-Cayetano motion was planned and with the Joel Villanueva viral videos… is it safe to say that he’s not just a part of it but might also be one of the masterminds? Why is he protecting Sara Duterte? Joel Villanueva is not making sense at all with all his excuses! The videos are clear! They didn’t ask him for procedural concerns, he was directing Imee Marcos. Lols! Also, there’s the other video of Robin Padilla saying “Hindi naman yan ang napag-usapan natin”. Ano ba ang napag-usapan? Remember how he buried the SOGIE bill as the majority leader? He started his speech by saying that he has a lot of LGBTQIA+ friends, he even dared to say that he has the utmost respect and love for them. Then, he moved to refer the bill to his committee after allegedly soliciting for letters from religious groups. Remember how he belittled the partylist representatives, as if that’s not what he started? Lols. Joel Villanueva turned out to be so much worse than the politician we despised in the past. Video: Bilyonaryo

Just

55,825 次观看 • 1 年前

Trump: I hope we get cooperation from the courts because you know, we have thousands of people that are ready to go out. And you cannot have a trial for all of these people. The system was not meant that not -- we don't think there is anything that says… We are getting them out. And a judge cannot say no, you have to have a trial. The trial is going to take two years. No, we are going to have a very dangerous country if we are not allowed to do what we are entitled to do.
0:48

Trump: I hope we get cooperation from the courts because you know, we have thousands of people that are ready to go out. And you cannot have a trial for all of these people. The system was not meant that not -- we don't think there is anything that says… We are getting them out. And a judge cannot say no, you have to have a trial. The trial is going to take two years. No, we are going to have a very dangerous country if we are not allowed to do what we are entitled to do.

Acyn

327,595 次观看 • 1 年前

This is Made by Jimbob knowingly and with free will, making it seem like I, a man who allowed him in my home, is a pedophile. You will see that in context my point was in defense of children and these people’s attempt to eliminate the age of consent. And he was paid, by the wife of Andrew Wilson in this clip. Show everyone. They prey on trust and innocence just like the pedophiles they protect. Tomorrow I go to war not with Andrew Wilson but his master. Evil. My battle is to not become angry and disgusting looking at and listening to him. That’s why he wants four hours. I am not afraid of embarassment, of being “exposed.” I am not afraid of financial punishment or social ostracism. I am only afraid that I will want to lash out at the demon. That’s what it wants. Children. If you say nothing while they do this then you deserve everything around you. You cannot complain as these people paint your hero’s as villains and villains as hero’s. For money. But if you simply acknowledge the good the true and the beautiful you will see you are already surrounded by paradise. See you tomorrow I,Hypocrite
6:46

Sensitive content

This is Made by Jimbob knowingly and with free will, making it seem like I, a man who allowed him in my home, is a pedophile. You will see that in context my point was in defense of children and these people’s attempt to eliminate the age of consent. And he was paid, by the wife of Andrew Wilson in this clip. Show everyone. They prey on trust and innocence just like the pedophiles they protect. Tomorrow I go to war not with Andrew Wilson but his master. Evil. My battle is to not become angry and disgusting looking at and listening to him. That’s why he wants four hours. I am not afraid of embarassment, of being “exposed.” I am not afraid of financial punishment or social ostracism. I am only afraid that I will want to lash out at the demon. That’s what it wants. Children. If you say nothing while they do this then you deserve everything around you. You cannot complain as these people paint your hero’s as villains and villains as hero’s. For money. But if you simply acknowledge the good the true and the beautiful you will see you are already surrounded by paradise. See you tomorrow I,Hypocrite

Owen Benjamin 🐻

63,623 次观看 • 10 个月前

Swalwell: As he was following the orders of the court and going to the proceedings. He was arrested and sent to Mexico over a judge's objection that he not be sent to Mexico. Noem: Did he have a criminal record? Swalwell: In 1995, he pled to a lesser nonviolent charge. Noem: I wish people would do things correctly. If they are not a legal status in this country, they can return home. We will pay for them to return home. I hope he got to $2600 he could have gotten. Swalwell: You think that makes up for not being with his family? The president also, by the way it is a convicted felon if you want to talk about criminal records.
2:19

Swalwell: As he was following the orders of the court and going to the proceedings. He was arrested and sent to Mexico over a judge's objection that he not be sent to Mexico. Noem: Did he have a criminal record? Swalwell: In 1995, he pled to a lesser nonviolent charge. Noem: I wish people would do things correctly. If they are not a legal status in this country, they can return home. We will pay for them to return home. I hope he got to $2600 he could have gotten. Swalwell: You think that makes up for not being with his family? The president also, by the way it is a convicted felon if you want to talk about criminal records.

Acyn

730,968 次观看 • 4 个月前

If you think Justice Clarence Thomas would ever bow to the left-wing mob targeting him, go back and watch this legendary clip of his 1991 confirmation hearing: Senator Hatch: “What’s Clarence Thomas going to do?” Justice Thomas: “I’d rather die than withdraw… not for the purpose of serving on the Supreme Court, but for the purpose of not being driven out of this process. I will not be scared. I don’t like bullies. I’ve never run from bullies. I never cry uncle, and I’m not going to cry uncle today whether I want to be on the Supreme Court or not.”
1:03

If you think Justice Clarence Thomas would ever bow to the left-wing mob targeting him, go back and watch this legendary clip of his 1991 confirmation hearing: Senator Hatch: “What’s Clarence Thomas going to do?” Justice Thomas: “I’d rather die than withdraw… not for the purpose of serving on the Supreme Court, but for the purpose of not being driven out of this process. I will not be scared. I don’t like bullies. I’ve never run from bullies. I never cry uncle, and I’m not going to cry uncle today whether I want to be on the Supreme Court or not.”

Carrie Severino

1,565,293 次观看 • 2 年前

This is the state of society today. A man thinks he has the right to access female-only spaces because his feelings were hurt by people not believing he is a woman. Is that not the object of the game? It is not a woman's burden that you have chosen to medicalise yourself, and it is not up to them to act as your human shield. Just stop. I had to edit out the ending of this video because a minor was on camera, and I do not allow that. I said: "I appreciate that, but women shouldn't have to feel uncomfortable for you to feel comfortable. If they continue to challenge you, advise them that you are male or speak to a member of staff." To see the full protest video, I have posted it on my Substack below. If you are interested in supporting me attending these protest please go to the link in the bio or subscribe to the substack.
1:08

This is the state of society today. A man thinks he has the right to access female-only spaces because his feelings were hurt by people not believing he is a woman. Is that not the object of the game? It is not a woman's burden that you have chosen to medicalise yourself, and it is not up to them to act as your human shield. Just stop. I had to edit out the ending of this video because a minor was on camera, and I do not allow that. I said: "I appreciate that, but women shouldn't have to feel uncomfortable for you to feel comfortable. If they continue to challenge you, advise them that you are male or speak to a member of staff." To see the full protest video, I have posted it on my Substack below. If you are interested in supporting me attending these protest please go to the link in the bio or subscribe to the substack.

MichaelDPUK 💜🦎

12,815 次观看 • 12 天前

Update On Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s Ongoing Court Proceedings Commences: Court begins at 9:00am; in the case of FRN vs Nnamdi Kanu Prosecution announces appearance as the defence announces appearance too, led by Kanu Agabi, SAN. Both parties affirm readiness for the business of the day — cross-examination of prosecution's third witness. Third witness, PW3, shielded and known as Mr. CCC is being led in oath Mr. CCC says he is a DSS operative for 27 years. Says he knows Nnamdi Kanu as the leader of IPOB PW3-CCC says he knew MNK since 2015. Transcription Of Examination Proceedings Witness PW3-CCC. PROSECUTION: Can you please tell the court who you are and if you know the defendant? WITNESS: I work with the SSS. I've worked for 27yrs. I know the defendant, He's the leader and founder of IPOB, a terrorist organization. He founded radio Biafra he used to invite violence to the public. My first encounter with him was in 2015, when I was asked to interrogate him after his arrest. I invited him with three other officers for interview, I told him his interview was going to be recorded and he agreed. He agreed to be recorded and also wrote down a statement himself. The interview was conducted on Oct 21st and written interview was on 23rd Oct both in 2015. The prosecution present the video interview and written statement of the defendant to the witness for identification The witness has confirmed both. PROSECUTION: You also told the court the defendant made written statement, right? WITNESS: Yes, my lord Prosecution takes permission to show the defendant the written statement obtained in 2015 Written statement is shown to the defendant (Nnamdi Kanu) DEFENCE COUNSEL(interjects): My client says the said 'written statement' under duress JUDGE to DEFENSE: You mean the 3 statements were made under duress? JUDGE: Can you prove it? Otherwise, I'm going to order "trial within trial". You have to prove it in specifics that your client made the statements involuntarily (under duress). Subsequently, the judge has asked the defendant to give element of his involuntariness to the written statement, asked that the defendant be given a sheet of paper to write them down. Paul Erokoro SAN reads the defendant's involuntariness statement: "I asked for my lawyer and the DSS refused. It wasn’t the gentleman in the dock that interviewed me, it was one Mr Brown. I was in dungeon and was allowed one hour of air time but Mr Brown threatened that if I did not write down what they wanted, the one hour airtime will to be taken away from me. I was forced by the DSS agent to write down some words against my will. And, I was bleeding from the nose at that time." JUDGE: What do you (prosecution) have to say about the said involuntariness? PROSECUTION: He was not beaten to made these statements. PROSECUTION to WITNESS: You also told the court the defendant made written statement CCC: Yes, my lord. Judge orders "TRIAL WITHIN TRIAL" to determine whether or not the statements made by the defendant was not under duress. N/B: A "trial within trial" is a legal procedure used in criminal trials, particularly in jurisdictions like Nigeria, where a confessional statement (a statement made by the accused admitting to a crime) is tendered as evidence. It's essentially a mini-trial within the main trial, designed to specifically determine whether the confessional statement was made voluntarily or involuntarily. Credit: FWP International Stay tuned For More Update:
2:58

Update On Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s Ongoing Court Proceedings Commences: Court begins at 9:00am; in the case of FRN vs Nnamdi Kanu Prosecution announces appearance as the defence announces appearance too, led by Kanu Agabi, SAN. Both parties affirm readiness for the business of the day — cross-examination of prosecution's third witness. Third witness, PW3, shielded and known as Mr. CCC is being led in oath Mr. CCC says he is a DSS operative for 27 years. Says he knows Nnamdi Kanu as the leader of IPOB PW3-CCC says he knew MNK since 2015. Transcription Of Examination Proceedings Witness PW3-CCC. PROSECUTION: Can you please tell the court who you are and if you know the defendant? WITNESS: I work with the SSS. I've worked for 27yrs. I know the defendant, He's the leader and founder of IPOB, a terrorist organization. He founded radio Biafra he used to invite violence to the public. My first encounter with him was in 2015, when I was asked to interrogate him after his arrest. I invited him with three other officers for interview, I told him his interview was going to be recorded and he agreed. He agreed to be recorded and also wrote down a statement himself. The interview was conducted on Oct 21st and written interview was on 23rd Oct both in 2015. The prosecution present the video interview and written statement of the defendant to the witness for identification The witness has confirmed both. PROSECUTION: You also told the court the defendant made written statement, right? WITNESS: Yes, my lord Prosecution takes permission to show the defendant the written statement obtained in 2015 Written statement is shown to the defendant (Nnamdi Kanu) DEFENCE COUNSEL(interjects): My client says the said 'written statement' under duress JUDGE to DEFENSE: You mean the 3 statements were made under duress? JUDGE: Can you prove it? Otherwise, I'm going to order "trial within trial". You have to prove it in specifics that your client made the statements involuntarily (under duress). Subsequently, the judge has asked the defendant to give element of his involuntariness to the written statement, asked that the defendant be given a sheet of paper to write them down. Paul Erokoro SAN reads the defendant's involuntariness statement: "I asked for my lawyer and the DSS refused. It wasn’t the gentleman in the dock that interviewed me, it was one Mr Brown. I was in dungeon and was allowed one hour of air time but Mr Brown threatened that if I did not write down what they wanted, the one hour airtime will to be taken away from me. I was forced by the DSS agent to write down some words against my will. And, I was bleeding from the nose at that time." JUDGE: What do you (prosecution) have to say about the said involuntariness? PROSECUTION: He was not beaten to made these statements. PROSECUTION to WITNESS: You also told the court the defendant made written statement CCC: Yes, my lord. Judge orders "TRIAL WITHIN TRIAL" to determine whether or not the statements made by the defendant was not under duress. N/B: A "trial within trial" is a legal procedure used in criminal trials, particularly in jurisdictions like Nigeria, where a confessional statement (a statement made by the accused admitting to a crime) is tendered as evidence. It's essentially a mini-trial within the main trial, designed to specifically determine whether the confessional statement was made voluntarily or involuntarily. Credit: FWP International Stay tuned For More Update:

Somto Okonkwo

16,790 次观看 • 1 年前

Kolkata, West Bengal: On Former CM Mamata Banerjee Appearing in the High Court, Senior Advocate Billwadal Bhattacharyya says, "See, the system is, if you are a Chief Minister, you have to keep your license of practice suspended. You have to deposit your license before the Bar Council of West Bengal. And once you are no more a Chief Minister, you have to apply for a resumption of practice certificate from the Bar Council. I can take a name, I was having a word with Justice Biswajit Basu that day, he is still unable to practice before the Honourable Supreme Court because he has applied for the resumption of practice certificate..."
0:45

Kolkata, West Bengal: On Former CM Mamata Banerjee Appearing in the High Court, Senior Advocate Billwadal Bhattacharyya says, "See, the system is, if you are a Chief Minister, you have to keep your license of practice suspended. You have to deposit your license before the Bar Council of West Bengal. And once you are no more a Chief Minister, you have to apply for a resumption of practice certificate from the Bar Council. I can take a name, I was having a word with Justice Biswajit Basu that day, he is still unable to practice before the Honourable Supreme Court because he has applied for the resumption of practice certificate..."

IANS

134,651 次观看 • 2 个月前

So, it turns out, my theory was right: the Senate drama was all to protect Sara Duterte! The receipts in this interview with Senator Bato dela Rosa completely expose the real plot behind the entire Senate circus. 1. Did you hear him? He literally admitted on camera that one of his main reasons for "resurfacing" from his six-month hiding streak was because he knew an impeachment trial was coming. 2. He explicitly stated that they needed him to be the crucial "13th vote" to pull off a change of Senate leadership (the coup orchestrated by Senator Alan Peter Cayetano). Why? Because the Senate leadership controls the rules, the timing, and the schedule of when the chamber convenes. 3. This entire staged drama and leadership shakeup wasn't about saving Bato from the ICC. It was a highly coordinated, desperate stunt to install a cooperative Senate leadership that can stall, delay, and completely disrupt convening as an impeachment court for VP Sara Duterte! While the public was distracted by the chaos and the shootout inside the chamber, the real game was always about protecting the Vice President from her accountability era. They used Bato as a pawn to secure the 13th vote, changed the leadership, and are now using the drama to buy Sara time. They are NOT lawmakers anymore; they’re a full-blown defense team disguised as a Senate majority! 🙄
1:19

So, it turns out, my theory was right: the Senate drama was all to protect Sara Duterte! The receipts in this interview with Senator Bato dela Rosa completely expose the real plot behind the entire Senate circus. 1. Did you hear him? He literally admitted on camera that one of his main reasons for "resurfacing" from his six-month hiding streak was because he knew an impeachment trial was coming. 2. He explicitly stated that they needed him to be the crucial "13th vote" to pull off a change of Senate leadership (the coup orchestrated by Senator Alan Peter Cayetano). Why? Because the Senate leadership controls the rules, the timing, and the schedule of when the chamber convenes. 3. This entire staged drama and leadership shakeup wasn't about saving Bato from the ICC. It was a highly coordinated, desperate stunt to install a cooperative Senate leadership that can stall, delay, and completely disrupt convening as an impeachment court for VP Sara Duterte! While the public was distracted by the chaos and the shootout inside the chamber, the real game was always about protecting the Vice President from her accountability era. They used Bato as a pawn to secure the 13th vote, changed the leadership, and are now using the drama to buy Sara time. They are NOT lawmakers anymore; they’re a full-blown defense team disguised as a Senate majority! 🙄

Thea Tan

208,617 次观看 • 2 个月前

Chiz Escudero is obviously burying the impeachment case against Sara Duterte The worst Senate President of all time cannot blame us for actually believing recent reports saying that in the interest of self-preservation — he is burying the impeachment case against Sara Zimmerman Duterte. To be on the good side of the Duterte bloc, he’s doing whatever it takes to block the impeachment trial. This is why scheduling the presentation of articles of impeachment on the last day of session is concerning. What kind of circus will they do to kill the complaint signed by 215 congressmen on the last day of the 19th Congress? By protecting Sara Zimmerman Duterte, the Senate is setting a very dangerous precedent. In an hour long press conference, Escudero did not only try to justify his decision to delay the impeachment proceedings —- he also tried to establish that the plenary could decide whether or not to proceed. The discretion whether or not to proceed with the impeachment trial is not within the powers of the plenary, as this is their constitutional duty. Please remember that the impeachable positions constitute a different level of popularity, power and influence —- the impeachment was written in our constitution to hold even the highest official accountable. If popularity and influence play any part in this delay — the Senate is practically abandoning their duty. In a no-trial scenario, Senate President Chiz Escudero should be held liable for protecting the accused and neglect of duty. Please remember that as stated by the constitution, the House of Representatives has the EXCLUSIVE power to initiate all cases of impeachment. Once transmitted, the Senate has “the sole try and decide all cases of impeachment”. With no trial, the Senate is undermining a co-equal chamber, another dangerous precedent. Sara Zimmerman Duterte wants “blood bath”, all her allies in the Senate should push for the impeachment trial. If she truly is innocent, this is a good venue to clear her name. Marcos, Padilla, Villar, Dela Rosa and Go should join Hontiveros, Pimentel and Tolentino in pushing for the impeachment trial. Escudero tried to hide behind the pending priority legislation but they just spent hours yesterday talking about the impeachment. Might as well proceed with the presentation of articles, right? Watching the Senate plenary session yesterday got me thinking “How are these issues more important than accountability?”
3:26

Chiz Escudero is obviously burying the impeachment case against Sara Duterte The worst Senate President of all time cannot blame us for actually believing recent reports saying that in the interest of self-preservation — he is burying the impeachment case against Sara Zimmerman Duterte. To be on the good side of the Duterte bloc, he’s doing whatever it takes to block the impeachment trial. This is why scheduling the presentation of articles of impeachment on the last day of session is concerning. What kind of circus will they do to kill the complaint signed by 215 congressmen on the last day of the 19th Congress? By protecting Sara Zimmerman Duterte, the Senate is setting a very dangerous precedent. In an hour long press conference, Escudero did not only try to justify his decision to delay the impeachment proceedings —- he also tried to establish that the plenary could decide whether or not to proceed. The discretion whether or not to proceed with the impeachment trial is not within the powers of the plenary, as this is their constitutional duty. Please remember that the impeachable positions constitute a different level of popularity, power and influence —- the impeachment was written in our constitution to hold even the highest official accountable. If popularity and influence play any part in this delay — the Senate is practically abandoning their duty. In a no-trial scenario, Senate President Chiz Escudero should be held liable for protecting the accused and neglect of duty. Please remember that as stated by the constitution, the House of Representatives has the EXCLUSIVE power to initiate all cases of impeachment. Once transmitted, the Senate has “the sole try and decide all cases of impeachment”. With no trial, the Senate is undermining a co-equal chamber, another dangerous precedent. Sara Zimmerman Duterte wants “blood bath”, all her allies in the Senate should push for the impeachment trial. If she truly is innocent, this is a good venue to clear her name. Marcos, Padilla, Villar, Dela Rosa and Go should join Hontiveros, Pimentel and Tolentino in pushing for the impeachment trial. Escudero tried to hide behind the pending priority legislation but they just spent hours yesterday talking about the impeachment. Might as well proceed with the presentation of articles, right? Watching the Senate plenary session yesterday got me thinking “How are these issues more important than accountability?”

Just

34,574 次观看 • 1 年前

REPORTER: The President was asked if Americans' financial concerns were motivating him to make a deal with Iran. His response was, "I don't think about Americans' financial situations." Do you think that's the right message? SPEAKER: I don't know the context in which he made that comment, but I can tell you the President thinks about Americans' financial situations. He's laser focused on trying to resolve the conflict in Iran because if we get the Strait of Hormuz when we get the Strait of Hormuz reopened, that will alleviate a lot of pressure with gas prices and other things in the economy.
1:11

REPORTER: The President was asked if Americans' financial concerns were motivating him to make a deal with Iran. His response was, "I don't think about Americans' financial situations." Do you think that's the right message? SPEAKER: I don't know the context in which he made that comment, but I can tell you the President thinks about Americans' financial situations. He's laser focused on trying to resolve the conflict in Iran because if we get the Strait of Hormuz when we get the Strait of Hormuz reopened, that will alleviate a lot of pressure with gas prices and other things in the economy.

Donald J Trump Posts TruthSocial

44,039 次观看 • 2 个月前

THE RECEIPTS DON'T LIE VP Sara Duterte’s defense team is begging to block all her financial records before 2022. But House Prosecutor Terry Ridon shut that down real quick. The prosecution is auditing her lifestyle all the way back to 2007! Why? Because, according to Ridon, you don’t just wake up a multi-millionaire overnight. Wealth takes time to accumulate (or hide). If you’re hiding a stash of 30 undeclared firearms, what else isn't in your SALN? 🤫 The evidence-marking is moving fast, and while the Senate Impeachment Court decides when to unlock the rest of the secrets, the prosecution is ready for July 6.
2:49

THE RECEIPTS DON'T LIE VP Sara Duterte’s defense team is begging to block all her financial records before 2022. But House Prosecutor Terry Ridon shut that down real quick. The prosecution is auditing her lifestyle all the way back to 2007! Why? Because, according to Ridon, you don’t just wake up a multi-millionaire overnight. Wealth takes time to accumulate (or hide). If you’re hiding a stash of 30 undeclared firearms, what else isn't in your SALN? 🤫 The evidence-marking is moving fast, and while the Senate Impeachment Court decides when to unlock the rest of the secrets, the prosecution is ready for July 6.

Thea Tan

173,999 次观看 • 1 个月前

Senate President Chiz Escudero said they can dismiss the impeachment complaint with just the majority vote It is as if Escudero is laying out the predicate — testing the waters and public clamour when the possibility of them dismissing the impeachment complaint actually happens. After the whole remand of the articles fiasco, we can see right through him and who is with him on this. It doesn’t take the most brilliant of minds to say that the constitution specifically says “TRY AND DECIDE” —- it is the mandate of the impeachment court for the actual trial to happen. Legal luminaries and even framers of the Philippine constitution call him out on this! I am beginning to believe what they say, that this is not about Sara Duterte anymore— this is about his Senate presidency. To decide whether or not the impeachment complaint is constitutional is not within the mandate of the Senate nor the impeachment court. Senate President Escudero is also trying to dilute the exclusive power granted by the Constitution to the House of Representatives to initiate impeachment proceedings — saying they can decide to dismiss the case even before trial. One very dangerous precedent if you ask me. We haven’t heard a decent explanation nor defense from Sara Zimmerman Duterte, not one from formal or informal set-up. The Vice President kept diverting the issue into technicalities and accusations. Where did all the money go? I am not a fan of Atty. Fortun but I respect what he can do but not even his law firm can give good defense. Sara Duterte’ ad cautelam even cited rulings that are no longer valid. Please watch the explanation of Atty. Bucoy from his press conference earlier this afternoon.
1:23

Senate President Chiz Escudero said they can dismiss the impeachment complaint with just the majority vote It is as if Escudero is laying out the predicate — testing the waters and public clamour when the possibility of them dismissing the impeachment complaint actually happens. After the whole remand of the articles fiasco, we can see right through him and who is with him on this. It doesn’t take the most brilliant of minds to say that the constitution specifically says “TRY AND DECIDE” —- it is the mandate of the impeachment court for the actual trial to happen. Legal luminaries and even framers of the Philippine constitution call him out on this! I am beginning to believe what they say, that this is not about Sara Duterte anymore— this is about his Senate presidency. To decide whether or not the impeachment complaint is constitutional is not within the mandate of the Senate nor the impeachment court. Senate President Escudero is also trying to dilute the exclusive power granted by the Constitution to the House of Representatives to initiate impeachment proceedings — saying they can decide to dismiss the case even before trial. One very dangerous precedent if you ask me. We haven’t heard a decent explanation nor defense from Sara Zimmerman Duterte, not one from formal or informal set-up. The Vice President kept diverting the issue into technicalities and accusations. Where did all the money go? I am not a fan of Atty. Fortun but I respect what he can do but not even his law firm can give good defense. Sara Duterte’ ad cautelam even cited rulings that are no longer valid. Please watch the explanation of Atty. Bucoy from his press conference earlier this afternoon.

Just

19,826 次观看 • 1 年前