Well we are just going to have to agree to disagree on certain points and have to move on.

But if indeed there was an advance of 41 million Dollars; whether kickbacks or not, that would should be covered under the Anti Money Laundering Act.

oops sori, i failed to clarify.

some kind soul quoted relevant provisions of the anti-graft law after i asked the question ‘is there such a crime as attempted bribery’. i think even manolo said that there is. i was persuaded, and thus that changed my mind that a bribery attemopt is already a crime in itself; from then on, theres no doubt in my mind that Abalos committed a crime.

hence my ‘correction’ on march 24 at 11:55 pm, especially my statement ‘only Abalos is culpable for the 200 offer’

as to the culpability of the others – my conclusion is based on what were presented during the hearings. you’re still hoping for future witness/es.

the US$41 million is an advance, so it can only come from one source – the Chinese! if the greedy group got money, thats not really kickbacks, but direct bribe money from the Chinese. but theres no evidence on the greedy group’s receipt of bribes on the same magnitude as Abalos’ 200 offer to Neri. hearsay, as lawyers would say

the 200 offer of Abalos is a smoking gun. all evidence on the greedy group presented before the circus that is the Senate is all hearsay.

If you never doubted that for one moment; how come you’re previously wondering if there even is such a crime as an “attempted bribery”? (Read your March 17 1:52 pm post)

You are acknowledging that there are many things you don’t know about the matter. Yet you are already exonerating the greedy group.

Abalos is supposed to be a member of the greedy group. But you seem quick to dissociate his actions from that of the group.

If Dante Madriaga is to be believed; 41 million Dollars has already been advanced to the greedy group. That is in contradiction to your claim that the greedy group will come in the picture if the project is implemented already, and when public funds are disbursed. Madriaga claims that another member of the greedy group other than Abalos took the initial money via his (the member) Hongkong Account from a Cayman bank.

If that is to be believed; seems they already got a large share.

Madriaga even claims that the greedy group asked the chinese for another 5 million Dollars for Joey De Venecia to “control” him. But since it was only Abalos who approached Neri and offered the “200″ with no other members of the greedy group in attendance; you’d exonerate the rest already.

We don’t know if the “200″ for Neri was already supposed to be included in the initial 41 million Dollars that the greedy group supposedly got.

But since we don’t know for sure; you would contend that it is still Abalos alone and no other members who is culpable.

“Well at least you’re sure now that the Abalos’ 200 offer is a violation”

hey never did i doubt that for one moment! i even mentioned that in an earlier comment!

“But since you are not sure where the “200″ will come from; how sure are you that the “200″ offer would not be coming from the group’s supposed kickbacks? It that was indeed 200 million Pesos then that would have been a hefty cut from Abalos’ supposed share if it was to come from his share alone.”

look, theres no way of knowing, unless (as i said earlier) they get another insider. but from the looks of it, our bright senators are more concerned on the size of the (potential) kickbacks!

the greedy group does not care where their kickbacks would be sourced, as long as they get their share!

“Was Abalos even representing himself alone when he offered that “200″ bribe and not representing the group already?”

i dont know

“If you are not sure of the other issues then I suggest you don’t write off yet the others as not culpable in the “200″ bribe”

only Abalos is culpable for the 200 offer. the greedy group comes in the picture if the project is implemented already, and when public funds are disbursed. the greedy group wasnt tasked with getting the project approved. thats Abalos’ task.

in short, the greedy group didnt offer a bribe. they’re only culpable once they get the kickbacks. but the project was cancelled, so they wont get kickbacks anymore. so what are they culpable of?

Well at least you’re sure now that the Abalos’ 200 offer is a violation.

But since you are not sure where the “200″ will come from; how sure are you that the “200″ offer would not be coming from the group’s supposed kickbacks? It that was indeed 200 million Pesos then that would have been a hefty cut from Abalos’ supposed share if it was to come from his share alone.

Was Abalos even representing himself alone when he offered that “200″ bribe and not representing the group already?

If you are not sure of the other issues then I suggest you don’t write off yet the others as not culpable in the “200″ bribe.

“Cancellation of the project doesn’t negate the allegation of the “200″ bribery. If the alleged “200″ was supposed to be sourced from the now supposed to be unrealized kickbacks; the alleged group that was supposed to “handle” the alleged kickbacks will definitely still be culpable.”

yes, cancellation does not erase the 200 offer of Abalos. i pointed that out earlier. it turns out that that is the only incidence of bribery.

nobody knows from where the 200 will be sourced. but one thing is for sure, Abalos’ 200 offer is a violation.

as for the group that will handle the kickbacks – this group’s reason for being is its receipt of the kickbacks. without the kickbacks, theres nothing to handle. as things stand now, without the kickbacks, they are not culpable

Cancellation of the project doesn’t negate the allegation of the “200″ bribery. If the alleged “200″ was supposed to be sourced from the now supposed to be unrealized kickbacks; the alleged group that was supposed to “handle” the alleged kickbacks will definitely still be culpable.

i doubt it. seeing the direction of the perpetual hearings, nobody is interested in knowing how the kickbacks would be sourced. it would seem that highlighting the greed is the quest.

isn’t it amusing? even if a witness leaks from where the kickbacks would be sourced, it would be all for naught. dahil cancelled na ang project! all potential kickbacks became vapor

Well there is still the possibility that ‘how the pie is divided’ might reveal where in that pie that alleged “200″ will come from as well as showing that there is actually that pie.

if they can get a witness, an insider, who will tell how the kickbacks would be paid off – one lump sum, on installment, downpayment muna, etc. – then the hearings should continue

the problem is, our bright senators just want to focus on the ‘how the pie is divided.’