When Nixon or Aquino does it, it’s not illegal


At the rate Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, Edwin Lacierda,and other Palace aides are defending President BS. Aquino from responsibility, culpability or liability for the Mamasapano incident, they could make Aquino exceed disgraced US president Richard Nixon in justifying illegal acts in office. And they will present Aquno with a bill in the form of public disgust with him and his presidency.

In 1977, three years after Nixon’s resignation in disgrace from the US presidency, British Journalist David Frost conducted a series of interviews with Nixon. It consisted of 12 interviews in all. They were transformed into four programs. CBS broadcast the programs in May 1997.

In one key segment, Frost asked Nixon bluntly about the legality or illegality of his acts in office, and those of his key assistants in the White House. The transcript read as follows:

Richard Nixon: When you’re in office you gotta do a lot of things sometimes that are not always in the strictest sense of the law, legal, but you do them because they’re in the greater interest of the nation.

David Frost: Alright wait, wait just so I understand correctly, are you really saying that in certain situations the President can decide whether it’s in the best interest of the nation and then do something illegal?…

Richard Nixon: I’m saying that when the President does it, that means it’s “not’ illegal!

David Frost: I’m sorry.

Notice how it was Frost, not Nixon, who said “I’m sorry.”

This could steel Aquino even more in resisting calls for him to apologize for Mamasapano. This could intensify the advice of his aides and Cabinet for him to stonewall all efforts to make him accept responsibility, culpability and liability for the tragedy.

The Nixon-Frost interviews were broadcast by CBS in May 1977. The first interview garnered 45 million viewers, the biggest audience on record for a political interview in history.

Nixon earned a cool $1 million for his efforts.

The interviews fell short of his hope of being rehabilitated in the public. A subsequent survey showed that a good majority of Americans declared that he should never again serve in public office.

Lacierda and De Lima

Flash forward to March 2015.

In this one, it’s not President Aquino doing the talking but his aides and subordinates.

Malacañang, speaking through presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda, disputed the finding of the PNP Board of Inquiry (PNP-BOI) that the President broke the chain of command when he dealt directly with then Special Action Force (SAF) commander Director Getulio Napeñas Jr. and allowed then suspended PNP chief Director General Alan Purisima to take part in Oplan Exodus that targeted high value terrorists.

The first and most basic fact is that the Philippine

The PNP is a civilian institution, established to replace the Philippine Constabulary-Integrated National Police (PC-INP),” Lacierda said.

“The President as Chief Executive cannot be subordinated to an internal process within the PNP when he exercises full and absolute control and supervision over all its members, regardless of rank,” Lacierda explained.

With similar ardor, Secretary Leila de Lima rebuffed the PNP-BOI’s conclusion that President Aquino broke the chain of command of the PNP, saying the President was not the commander-in-chief of the PNP in the first place.

“While the President has the prerogative to deal directly with any of his subordinates, the act of dealing with Napeñas instead of OIC-PNP Espina bypassed the established PNP Chain of Command,” the BOI report read.

“Comprehensive as the BOI Mamasapano Report wishes to be, it starts on the wrong premise insofar as the role of the President as commander-in-chief of the PNP is concerned,” De Lima pointed out.

“He is not the PNP commander-in-chief because under the 1987 Constitution, the PNP is no longer part of the Armed Forces. The President is only commander-in-chief in relation to the armed forces. The PNP, being a civilian agency, is not part of the armed forces,” De Lima maintained.

“In relation to the PNP, the President is the Chief Executive, in the same way that he acts as the Chief Executive to all the civilian agencies of the Executive bureaucracy,” she added.

De Lima accused the PNP of nurturing a “misplaced military culture and tradition” within its ranks, manifested by its belief that it is still part of the armed forces.”

She has had the temerity to dismiss an executive order signed by President Fidel V. Ramos on the subject of command responsibility. She does not recognize that in the bureaucracy, no less then in the military, there is a hierarchy of authority.

Private corporations and civic organizations have such structure.

Even our local barangay has a command structure.
It’s significant that Nixon’s attorney general John Mitchell, John Haldeman and John Ehrlichman, wound up dead or in jail.

De Lima and Lacierda would do well to watch what they do and what they say. No one is amused.

From Richard 3rd to Aquino 3rd

They will have to summon all their wiles to deal with the fact that whatever title President Aquino wears on the Mamasapano incident – chief executive or commander in chief – Aquino authorized and micro-managed Oplan Exodus, and he placed suspended police general Alan Purisima in charge of the operation.
This connotes responsibility.

Lacierda’s and Delima’s defense of Aquino is even more frightening than Nixon’s defense. They use the word “absolute” to describe Aquino’s power.

This elevates Aquino 3rd to the level of the hunchback king, Richard 3rd.

As with the other Richard, when Richard 3rd did it, it was not illegal. It was deadly.
Same with Mamasapano.



Please follow our commenting guidelines.


  1. Roldan Guerrero on

    This is the 1st time I have seen a Philippine President has as many spokespersons, I cant enumerate them all, meshing and bungling each other misleading the public what is true and not. America, Japan, European countries and other progressive nations, their state leaders speak for themselves to avoid inaccuracy of the leader`s message. In the Philippines, even government bureaus and departments have their spokespersons. What a waste of money, should this funds would only be spent on so many important government undertakings, then there should be no misappropriations and useless government spendings. Is this how stupid our president IS that he cant tell by himself what he is obliged to tell to the people?

  2. When Frost said “I’m sorry. I don’t think it means “I’m sorry that I’ve offended you.”\It’s more like “I’m sorry for you.” Ask any American to find out if I’m right.

  3. lleuxquiocho on

    does that mean that the organizational structure of LGUs prescribed by the DILG is obsolete? if that is so, there’s no need for protocols or for proper channels anymore!

    careful delimalima… your irresponsible statement can be (mis) construed in a million ways!!!

  4. Amnata Pundit on

    Please, there is no comparison between Nixon and Boy Sayad. I’m not a Nixon fan, but except for that bungled burglary attempt by his minions- how different is that from the bungled attempt to kidnap Lozada during the tempest over the NBN-ZTE deal of GMA? – which may make him amoral (par for the course for politicians) but not a lunatic nor an intellectual cretin like this retardate in the Palace today. Nixon is actually considered by the Republican Party as one of the colossus of modern American Presidents for his accomplishments in foreign policy while the only thing colossal about this fellow is his capacity to lie which definitely exceeds that of Nixon but is surpassed by the only one who deserve to be compared to him, that is no less than the father of all congenital liars himself, Ninoy Aquino.

  5. It is just a play of words, because an act may be legal but can it be lawful? Both terms are defined by The Free Dictionary as:

    The terms lawful and legal differ in that the former contemplates the substance of law, whereas the latter alludes to the form of law. A lawful act is authorized, sanctioned, or not forbidden by law. A legal act is performed in accordance with the forms and usages of law, or in a technical manner. In this sense, illegal approaches the meaning of invalid. For example, a contract or will, executed without the required formalities, might be regarded as invalid or illegal, but could not be described as unlawful.

    The term lawful more clearly suggests an ethical content than does the word legal. The latter merely denotes compliance with technical or formal rules, whereas the former usually signifies a moral substance or ethical permissibility. An additional distinction is that the word legal is used as the synonym of constructive, while lawful is not. Legal fraud is Fraud implied by law, or made out by construction, but lawful fraud would be a contradiction in terms. Legal is also used as the antithesis of equitable, just. As a result, legal estate is the correct usage, instead of lawful estate. Under certain circumstances, however, the two words are used as exact equivalents. A lawful writ, warrant, or process is the same as a legal writ, warrant, or process.

    So definitely, there is an infraction of the law made by BS Cojuangco Aquino III, in not coordinating with the different branches of national and local defensive forces, with both equally holding the same powers of maintaining peace and order in the country – Philippines is still one country, is it not?

  6. These Two Clowns, Lashingda and Dillemma – will employ the use of technical words to shield their Boss at all costs – the play of technical words to cover their boss’ ass.
    A convenient way to shield the Boss from the ultimate responsibility as the Top man in the echelon of supreme hierarchy, whether this is the C in C, Chief Executive, or Master Planner/Executioner of Oplan Wolverine-Exodus – the President’s fingerprints can not be hidden from the Facts. As the Abnoy stated from his Biblical quotes, “the truth will set us free”, the same applies to him while up to this time he is still imprisoned by his flip-flopping statements, denials here, denials there, and a humongous mumbo jambo of convoluted statements that digs himself further into LIES, lies, and more lies. Nixon stands a couple of levels above Penoy.

  7. Could this be called semantics, or splitting hairs or the equivalent. But as is always the case with everyone in the philippines, ” its not my fault, im not responsible ” but equally as is always the case in the philippines if something good happens then its because of them, their actions made it happen so please reward them. Pnoy has his good points but on this he is way out. But again the inquiry in this is a complete joke. The 300 troops that were just a short distance away who knew real time what was happening to their comrades did nothing, have they been interviewed. Surely every single one of them should be interviewed to try to find out why they didnt help their compatriots. People are defending themselves here & no one seems to want the truth to come out.

  8. venerando desales on

    Pnoy’s political capital is done! He can still soar to 100 percent! How? By doing the sublime act of christian humility, that is to pave the way for a smooth and constitutional transition of power. He can lead the change in the form of government from republicanism to either federal or parliamentary with a commitment that he is only a transition president just what his mother Cory did. He can lead to introduce revolutionary reforms like the passing of the anti dynasty bill, the anti vote buying bill, and the two party bill. But he cannot do these patriotic acts if he do not dismiss those cabinet secretaries who are drawing misfortunes upon misfortunes on his administration. And, above all, he should repent and then beg the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Pnoy and our leaders must always remember that they are governing the people of God. The prayers of miserable people are always listened to by God. Must Pnoy and his cabinet wait for Moses to come?Must they wait to be lashed and called thieves by Jesus the way he did to the profiteers in the Temple? Or must they wait the misfortune of Mussolini?

  9. If the operation to get the terrorists were successful, these same people would be hogging for the limelight and Pnoy would have called himself a proud CinC. How this monsters are fooling the Filipinos. They think people take their nonsense hook line and sinker.

  10. Yen, I am glad you are no longer comparing the Mamasapano incident to other botched military operations in history, like the Bay of Pigs, Iran-Contra or the Black Hawk ambushed in Somalia because you know the American people never blamed their presidents for the military miscalculations. So why would the Filipinos treat the Mamasapano military incident any different?. Instead, you want to use another incident where a U.S. president was forced to resign hoping you can sway the Filipinos to think, your way.. But this is where you are making a bigger mistake because the Filipinos will not bite your bait without checking the facts. Nixon’s problem was a direct, calculated, criminal act of breaking in the Watergate building to steal secrets they can used against Pres. Nixon’s enemies. It was called the Watergate Scandal, a criminal violation There was a criminal intent on the part of Pres. Nixon right from the beginning, caught on tape from the presidential office. In contrast,the Mamasapano incident was a military operation intended to capture notorious moro terrorists. For you to present to the Filipinos that the Philippine incident is similar to the Watergate break in is not only an added insult to the officers who died doing their heroic duty but also demeaning to the intelligence of the Filipinos. Yen, you should be ashamed of yourself

  11. granny goose on

    If there’s any bit of conscience among the spokespersons, I can only wish them well… it is very difficult to be schizophrenic in one’s right mind… otherwise they are plainly very good actors or just as deluded as the person they’re defending…

  12. Jose A. Oliveros on

    LIEla DILEMMA, is the Secretary of JUSTIFICATION; not the Secretary of Justice and that is the simple reason why she is always quick to defend her President. As for Lacierda, he is just a spokesman – he is not even allowed to think.

  13. chthonic monster on

    no wonder it failed, nobody was in charge, it was such an organised chaos after all!

  14. Leodegardo Pruna on

    De Lima, Coloma, Lacierda, Valte, etc. could make a good combo team for what they are doing in covering up the misdeeds of their boss. For what? Before P-Noy leaves office, these very people will be seating in commissions to continue commissioning he public. God bless the Philippines.

  15. Absolutely illegal, absolutely deadly, absolutely evil. That is why it is absolutely necessary to stop the madman from causing further harm to our country.

  16. Cres Malifier on

    Sir, Yen, kulang pagbabatikos mo sa PCOS machnes ng Smartmatic. Bahala na lang ang Diyos sa atin!

  17. CEO or president, he is still the commander-In-Chief and he acted as such. He is still responsible for the order or command he gave illagally to suspended Purisima and down to Nepanes. There is no way PNoy can wiggle out of his responsibilty, even with the lies of his incompetent tutas Lacierda and De Lima.