El Jon Bunao

[PING LACSON @iampinglacson]

It’s hard to imagine that more than 2,300 years after his death, the great Greek philosopher Plato could foresee how the loudest “fool” of our time would confront the corruption issues in his bailiwick.

[A Winner 🏀 🎯 @WinWith1k]

Acceptance is the last form of control.

[✧˚ @Kinngszn]

solivance

[En Júpiter @En_jupiter_]

HERMOSA REFLEXIÓN

[El Jon Bunao @Eeeedge]

Naisip ko lang. Nakakasunod kaya si Idol Robin Padilla sa impeachment court? Or di na niya need makinig kasi nakalock na siya mag-acquot dahil "trabaho" ng opposition?

[⋆ @lowkeyalbert]

Me pretending to be okay with a situation that's clearly affecting me

[El Jon Bunao @Eeeedge]

@gmanews Eto mahirap sa walang legal background
-Sen. Marcoleta

[ABS-CBN News @ABSCBNNews]

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines says the Senate session last June 3, 2026, when a quorum of 12 was constituted, is lawful and valid.

[🇵🇭 Laitera🇵🇭 @laiteranidaddy]

Vico Sotto once said .

[El Jon Bunao @Eeeedge]

@iampinglacson Baka Sen Risa. Pang clap back sa ad hominem ni Sen Marcoleta.

[Tessy | You're My Favorite Song | Reality TV @CollabS12PBB]

Thank you so much for bringing up SP Cayetano's clarification on what the Dividing The House mean

But, it actually weakens the Majority's case

Let's study what happened:

1. “May 11 pa na-present” said by Sen. Marcoleta. But that's not the full story

Yes, Marcoleta raised the motion on May 11.

But Lacson rebutted the May 11 records showed the matter was referred to the Committee on Rules, and Cayetano confirmed that during interpellation.

That matters because once referred, the committee process should apply (Senate PH Rule XI, Section 24)

2. Lacson’s point: Rule 136 does not erase the committee referral.

Cayetano relied on Senate PH Rule LI, Section 136 to combat Rule XI, Section 24, which allows amendment of Senate Rules by motion if presented one day before consideration.

But Lacson’s answer was - that applies if there was no referral.

Since the motion was already presented AND was already referred to Rules Committee, Rule XI and Section 24 should supercede Rule LI Section 136

quoting:
"(that was referred)... committees must meet, discuss, decide, and submit a report."

3. The Committee on Rules was not properly functioning - because of the removal of Senate President Sotto.

Lacson said all posts had been declared vacant after the May 11 leadership change.

So there was no chairman or members of the Committee on Rules. But the matter was already referred

(ie: Napunta na yung motion sa Committee on Rules, pero dahil wala pang chairmanship or hindi pa na-constitute ang bagong committee, hindi pa siya naasikaso)

Lacson's question was simple: how can the Committee On Rules act if it had not even been constituted?

4. Sotto backed the process argument.

Sotto reportedly said the Committee on Rules should first be constituted before the motion is discussed.

He also objected as an ex officio member, asking in Taglish: “Tumawag ba? Ano ’to binabraso?”

In other words, even the Minority Leader was saying the process looked like strong-arming or bulldozing the process by skipping the Committee on Rules.

5. The Motion to divide the house curtails Rule XI, Section 24

Tama ka! Hindi automatically mali ang “motion to divide the House.”

Ang mali ay ginamit ito to force plenary action on a controversial Senate Rules amendment while the proposal had already been referred to the Committee on Rules

Wala pang malinaw na committee action or report from the very Committee. That's why the process seemed suspiciously being railroaded.

6. So why was it railroading for Cayetano to start to Divide The House and debate.

Because if that motion passed, the Senate would effectively move straight to plenary action while skipping the Committee on Rules step.

And that step matters.

Doon dapat dini-discuss ang pros, cons, safeguards, loopholes, quorum, voting, and consequences of changing the Senate Rules.

Pero hindi pa iyon nagagawa.
No proper committee meeting.
No decision.
No report.

So hindi ito simpleng “procedural vote lang.”

Once the Senate agrees to take it up in plenary, the Majority can move quickly - sponsorship, interpellation, amendments, then adoption and within the session.

Simple majority votes lang ang kailangan.

So basically, if the division of the House passed, the Senate would be acting as if: “Tapos na ang Committee on Rules. Decision time na.”

But that was exactly the deliberation.
Hindi pa tapos ang proseso - yan ang ungol ng Minority

7. If the Dividing The House motion passed, the Majority is basically saying, "tapos na ang Committee on Rules", decision time na.

“Tapos na ang Committee on Rules. Decision time na.”

But that was exactly the problem.

The Committee on Rules was not properly constituted. No proper committee deliberation had happened. No report had been submitted.

So when Cayetano says he only wanted to bring it back to plenary “to deliberate,” that sounds reasonable but it misses the point or even hiding an uglier motive.

Plenary deliberation will replace Committee on Rules deliberation.

So bringing it straight to plenary was not just “for deliberation.” It was a shortcut hidden as a "discuss na natin dito"

They wanted to skip the Committee on Rules process because they had the numbers.

So the Minority walked out because they refused to legitimize a shortcut.

"For Deliberation" sabi ni Cayetano shall not be used as an excuse to avoid deliberation on Committee on Rules, yan ang reply ng Minority

WHICH IS SUMMARIZED IN:
You cannot ask to change the Rules of the Senate while ignoring the Rules of the Senate.

That is not procedure.
That is railroading dressed up as procedure.

Cayetano is saying "procedure 'to" BUT intentionally skipping ACTUAL PROCEDURE

[El Jon Bunao @Eeeedge]

Eto resulta ng wala dapat bagsak na estudyante. Dapat talaga ipilit yung bagsak tapos repeater kahit man lang sa mga basic learning.

[ABS-CBN News @ABSCBNNews]

“'YUNG SOBRANG BASIC NA PAGBABASA, HINDI NILA KAYA”

Aminado si Danim Majerano, pioneer senior high school teacher sa Kapitolyo High School sa Pasig City, na marami sa kanyang Grade 11 students ang patuloy pa ring hirap umintindi sa binabasa. | via @francisorcio

[トニー (Tony Choi) @TonyWonwoo]

20代から10年以上筋トレしてて一番後悔してるのがモビリティ運動を全くしなかったことかな。これ今朝やってみたけど朝ルーティンにしたらめっちゃ良さそう。

[PING LACSON @iampinglacson]

Apologies to lawyers, I will paraphrase a classic legal aphorism:
“If the facts are on your side, pound the facts.
If the RULE is on your side, pound the RULE.
If neither the facts nor the RULE are on your side, MOVE TO DIVIDE THE HOUSE.”

[El Jon Bunao @Eeeedge]

My president

[Rod Magaru @rodmagaru]

I miss our kind of Senate like this. Mornin. 🥺

[El Jon Bunao @Eeeedge]

Isipin niyo nga. Kung may tinanggap si Sen @iampinglacson e bakit di siya yung nagpupumilit ipasok sa WPP yung magasawa? Maidikit lang e no?

[El Jon Bunao @Eeeedge]

Nakakaamoy ako na maraming 8080ng gagawing Senador si Barzaga

[El Jon Bunao @Eeeedge]

Bakit ba pinipilit niyo magpangalan si Lacson. Dating pulis yan nagkukumpleto muna ng evidence yan para surpresa at walang kawala. Paka ano niyo.