Playing Sherlock

The impeachment trial droned on and on. Again and again, the prosecution was given the chance to nail the case, only to fail miserably again and again as it dilly-dallies with dubious evidence, unreliable witnesses and public display of hubris devoid of any leverage. Even in the eyes of a layman, it’s not hard to deduce that the result of this controversial trial will hardly change, even with the five-week break declared by the Senate to pave way for the Lenten season. Given the already battered reputation of the ragtag team of prosecutors and the “Noynoying” epidemic, it’s only a matter of time before this pile of shame accumulated by the Aquino administration collapses on themselves, effectively bringing down the “Daang Matuwid” demagogue of our beloved president, together with its twisted dreams of personal vendetta.

However, the Aquino administration, together with its cohorts, might just be tougher than we give them credit for. Despite the decaying public image of the Yellow brigade in their cartoonish campaign against the “evil” respondent Chief Justice Renato Corona, these folks may haven’t run out of dirt to throw just yet.

I mean, after all that scolding from the Senate, I have a friggin' stockpile in my underwear.

Subscribe to our Substack community GRP Insider to receive by email our in-depth free weekly newsletter. Opt into a paid subscription and you'll get premium insider briefs and insights from us.
Subscribe to our Substack newsletter, GRP Insider!
Learn more

Recently, blogger-journalist Raissa Robles dug up some serious dirt that can potentially damage the reputation of the respondent.

“A journalist and blogger has sought the help of her readers in the US to help her determine the identity of a certain ‘Renato C. Corona’ whom she says US public records have linked to properties in Tampa, Florida and Mountain View, California.

“In her blog, Raissa Robles said the records turned up a ‘Renato C. Corona’, aged 63, with his “most recent address” at 1401 Bayshore Boulevard in Tampa.”

(Source: Link)

Undoubtedly, the said journalist has done something truly worthy of your good ol’ local tabloids; make some major scoop and stir the masses by digging on an individual’s personal life. As if turning the whole issue into some sort of a mediocre showbiz gossip, Raissa Robles posed a rhetorical question to her readers:

“You might say there are many Renato Coronas in the world. You would probably be right. There’s a long list of them in California alone.

“But how many Renato Coronas in the world have ‘C’ as their middle initial; are 63 years old; was born in October 1948; and have relatives named Cristina, Carla, Francis and Charina?”

In an attempt to substantiate her mud-slinging hypothesis, Robles acknowledged her very trustworthy sources; an anonymous person under the name of “Yvonne,” and Tomas Gomez, a former Philippine consul general to the United States.

Seems legit.

According to her, the data gathered by her associates (the manner of which is yet to be confirmed) corroborate the respondent’s personal information:

“She added that she, Yvonne and former Philippine consul general to the US Tomas Gomez “separately confirmed that not only do the names of Chief Justice Corona’s children match those of the Renato C. Corona found in US public records. The ages of the children are also a perfect match.”

Quoting an excerpt from a feature story on the Corona couple, Robles wrote: “According to Renato and Cristina Corona, their first-born child Carla was born in 1972 which makes her 40 years old today; Francis was born in 1977 which makes him 35 years old today; and Charina was born in 1978 which makes her 34 years old today.”

‘This data matches the ages obtained by People Smart and Intelius. Both sites are sort of digital detectives that draw information on individuals from US public records.’”

Truly, Robles has really outdone herself this time. However, despite her seemingly revelatory discovery, several skeptical “netizens” have offered their contentions with the journalist’s findings. Several of them even have problems with Robles’ suggestion that the respondent might own property at Tampa, Florida at all. One of the “netizens” even warned the journalist about the dangers of baseless accusations:

“And another named Johnny Lin cautioned:

Tampa bay does not make sense to buy as vacation house since Charina lives in CA.

Charina lived in Mountain View in 2008 then the Roseville property was bought in 2008. Mountain View is about 3-4 hours drive from Roseville. That is probably when Charina changed work place in 2008 but it appears to be a condo complex. It is not a beach home so it is not a vacation home.

Baka makuryente kayo pag sinabi ninyo na me property si Corona sa US. Research muna natin itong Roseville. Pag nabiling cash, yun pwedeng hanapin kung kayang bayaran ni Charina dahil nung 2009 binili din niya cash ang McKinley condo.”

However, transcending the curious speculations surrounding this dubious fishing expedition of Robles and friends is the moral ground upon which their actions were based. In Robles’ article, she was quick to defend herself in saying:

“No, I’m not saying that CJ Corona OWNS Bayshore or has a house in Mountain View. Heavens, no.”

(Source: Link)

I’m just saying that he might.

Still, there is an underlying principle that can somehow shed some light into the legitimacy of Robles’ actions, which can, in turn, shed light into her credibility as a journalist.

Were her actions journalistic?

She fastidiously clings to her claim that she is a passionate investigative journalist, but what she did was comparable to what your showbiz paparazzi would do, which is quite frankly, unbecoming of someone who is supposed to inform people about the politics of society… which brings me to refresh my memory of the journalists’ code of ethics as adopted by the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines. Here are some points worth pondering about.

(Source of ethics: Link)

“III. I shall resort only to fair and honest methods in my effort to obtain news, photographs and/or documents, and shall properly identify myself as a representative of the press when obtaining any personal interview intended for publication.”

Her abiding by the third code is yet to be proven, given the highly dubious sources she utilized in publishing this “news.” However, even with the limited information we have on our hands right now, we can at least come up with a few insightful speculations regarding the legitimacy of her actions. Here I have an excerpt the terms of service of Intelius, the information agency Robles made use of in her cyberspace espionage.

1. General Restrictions.

You agree to use our information only for appropriate, legal purposes, and in compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. Additionally, you agree that our databases and information may not be used to bother, stalk, harass, threaten or embarrass any individual. You may not use the service to look up celebrities or other public persons, or to locate individuals under the age of 18. Information shall not be provided or resold to any other person or entity without our prior written consent. All searches of our databases are tracked, and (as noted below) you consent to such tracking and to the provision of all information about your use of our databases to law enforcement and others as may be useful to respond to allegations that our service or information has been misused.

2. Additional Restrictions.

In the event of using this service for criminal or civil background checks, you should not assume that this data provides a complete or accurate history of any person’s criminal or civil history. You should consult state and federal laws before using this information in making decisions on hiring or firing of employees. Intelius cannot offer legal advice on how to use the information contained in criminal or civil background reports, and is not responsible for any action taken by the customer based on this information. Customers should use extreme caution when interpreting the results of a criminal or civil background search for any type of personal verification. Positive or false matches in criminal or civil searches may not provide confirmation of an individual’s criminal or civil background. Proper use of these reports is the responsibility of you, the customer.

(Source: Link)

Upon reading the legal terms, several questions inevitably come to mind:

1. What, again, was the intention of Robles and company in trying so hard to obtain sensitive information?

2. Were they able to preserve the trust between Intelius and themselves, its clients?

3. Did they consider the implications of the agency’s open admission of the uncertainty of the accuracy of the documents in their database?

4. Did they consider the consequences of misinterpreting one’s reputation, especially that of the respondent, given the records obtained from the Internet?

As a self-proclaimed “investigative journalist,” it is only imperative that you think things through before publishing any material that can implicate somebody, especially if that somebody is standing on trial, wouldn’t you agree? After all, a journalist’s job is to inform, not to mystify.

“IV. I shall refrain from writing reports that will adversely affect a private reputation unless the public interest justifies it. At the same time, I shall fight vigorously for public access to information.”

Given the frenzy of the Yellow masses to implicate the respondent at all costs, no matter how dirty the tactics may be, she might just pass through the test of the fourth code and justify the questionable claim of her being a journalist, if not for the fact that she’s at odds with the other codes to begin with.

“VIII. I shall presume persons accused of crime of being innocent until proven otherwise. I shall exercise caution in publishing names of minors and women involved in criminal cases so that they may not unjustly lose their standing in society.”

…Now we’re talking. Given the calloused and snide comments towards the respondent, encompassing even his loved ones and relatives, one can only wonder on whether she really fits the title she bestowed upon herself.

Truly, this unexpected turn of events once again proved how far someone can go in the name of a very juicy scoop. Publishing news based on unverified data, running at odds with the TOS of an agency you yourself made use of, and risking violation of journalistic ethics, it’s no wonder why more and more people question the credibility of this “investigative journalist.” And it’s no wonder how low the Philippine brand of journalism has sunk throughout the years, trying to make a shameful travesty of investigative reporting.

Quoting renowned fictional detective Sherlock Holmes:

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”

98 Replies to “Playing Sherlock”

  1. Could it be that Raissa The Driftwood Woman is just satirical?

    Thanks for the post. I would not visit her blog at all cost. At least, through this blog, at least, I can see that this driftwood woman has her own special definition of objectivity.

        1. You’re talking about Raissa, right?

          I honestly don’t like wasting my time on you, but I just can’t help it when you spew double entendres that also apply to the side you’re fanatically defending. LOL.

    1. Ah, yes. I’ve had the misfortune of having to read her blog for my little investigation. Unsettling as it may seem, but I felt the need to point out the journalist’s faux pas with facts.

      1. Raissas blog is much better. Maraming tao, mraming ngtitiwala at naniniwala kysa dito na my bahid ni Gloria

        1. This is much better. Kung Yellow Propaganda at mga tsismosa ang tiwala mo, wala kang maibabato sa katotohanan.

          Sorry, but your standard of trust is hell low. 😛

        2. Look at daily visitorS here and Raissa. D2 mga pRo GLORIA lang palagi kina raisSA ibA ibA tao sa lipunan

        3. @Vincenzo:

          Not really pro-Gloria but anti-stupidity.

          Raissa’s blog is more like a tabloid to read and most who read her blog are full of tsismis and stuff, loves to demonize other people.

          It’s a proof of a dysfunctional society. You’re the true idiot because you know nothing at all. Ang mga taong pumupunta sa blog niya are those who have squatter mentality. Vincenzo and others have that. And we’re not.

        4. Who let this dog out? woof, woof, woof, woof…

          Raissa’s blog is much better kuno sa mga katulad mo dahil mahilig ka sa tsismis at ayaw mo mag-isip para sa sarili.

        5. @vincenzo
          And how is Raissa’s blog any better? She can’t even provide CREDIBLE sources for her stupid blog.

          Face it vincenzo, your tito noy,his yellow zombies, and YOU are going to hell for your stupidity.

        6. At ang mga naniniwala sa kanya ay ang mga katulad mong uto-uto. Ang hilig mong mag-noynoying ano? Palagi ka na lang ignorante kasi e.

        7. “Face it vincenzo, your tito noy,his yellow zombies, and YOU are going to hell for your stupidity.”

          –>what sucks is that they’re taking everyone else with them.

  2. The prosecution team are just incompetent and stupid; like their Client : Noynoy Aquino, and the Hacienda Luisita. Noynoy Aquino will hire people, to turn the whole world around, just to convict Chief Justice Corona…He will hire Dirt diggers, Computer Hackers, other people of dubious characters to Demonize his Obsession: Chief Justice Corona…

      1. Corruption is not the root cause but it’s the dysfunctional culture.

        So how about the low levels, eh? Or how about YOU?

      2. @Vincenzo, tell your uncle noy, he will never get 10B for HLI. and give him his anti-psychotic medicines please. btw, take some for yourself also…

      3. Wrong again nimrod, it should be
        “Tito Noy is doing what the HLI want him to do. Palaganapin ang corruption at proteksyonan ang HACIENDA.”

        1. Palibhasa kasing sirang plaka si vincenzo kaya paulit ulit nalang ang pinopost na kagaguhan dito

      4. Noynoy Aquino fights corruption, by subjecting his political enemmies to political inquisitions…While he protects his corrupt cronies, and is corrupting preople, himself. To protect his ill gotten land: Hacienda Luisita…Bribing the 188 Tongressmen to vote for the 5 minutes deliberation of impeachment of Justice Corona is the highest form of corruption…

      1. We would love to read more of this kind of articles…it makes sense…although, we have nonsense people commenting, mostly YellowTards – thinking they can influence other bloggers, to become YellowTards…

  3. this raissa robles has gone way past irresponsible journalism. I for one have used this Intellius to search for a friend in the US and it gave me results of my friend’s name relating to addresses of houses he does not own. It is apparently very obvious that the only purpose of her piece of junk blog is to maliciously impute that the CJ own properties abroad and then further reason out that lawyers of CJ or CJ should deny it if it werent true huh? Excuse me, you do not deserve an iota of energy from CJ or his lawyers if at all they should charge you for unjust vexation to say the least. FYI the right to freedom of expression is not absolute, and this raissa should be ashamed of herself to even enjoy such a precious right!

    1. Apparently, our mud-slinging “journalist” got so excited over this “discovery” that she failed to pay attention to this agency’s warning:

      “…you should not assume that this data provides a complete or accurate history of any person’s criminal or civil history.”

      And then, responsible journalism was thrown out the window. 😛

      1. I also remember the names on the list of the casualties of 9/11 terroristic attack published in the net. Included was the name of Panfilo Lacson since he was allegedly in US of A during that time covering his hidden bank deposit.

      1. Third party sources. Fabricated sources. All of them are just like from the tabloids. Do you read tabloids? If you do then I’m right.

        BOBO ka. 😛

        1. Obviously, Vincenzo B. Arellano cannot distinguish between a FACT and an OPINION. Meaningful and logical discussions are impossible with the likes of him.

        2. ako nga, ginamit ko iba’t ibang search engine, lumitaw pangalan ko 100 times at 100 different locations… reliable source… bobo talaga itong vinzenso na ito…

      2. stupid, san galing ang source? sa net… e sino ung benigno aquino na meron ding address sa US? RELIABLE SOURCE… my ass!

  4. i looked at her blog – hilarious
    hardly a journalist – from what insiders say ‘ a black propagandist paid by malacanan via a contract with abs-cbn’ i.e. the lowest of the low.
    and her cult followers who display a blind stupidity in their inane and insular comments. thank god educated people dont take any if it seriously.
    maybe these were/are the respondents in false asia surveys!
    at least she provides a laugh.
    maybe she should face cuevas – or she is too yellow!

    1. Once, I gave Ms. Robles the benefit of doubt and tried to read her blogs and articles and understand where she’s coming from. But I got sick in the stomach, because of so many insinuations.

  5. Well i did a quick google search of “Is intellius accurate” I got this from yahoo answrs

    “I am a professionsal skip tracer and interning Private Investegator and I would not rely on Intelius. The searches I use are Accurint, Innovis, Insight, and Experian Skiptracing. All are very good and reliable. TRY THOSE! If you cant get access to them, maybe you should look into hiring a private investegator. Here are some free ideas:
    *Call directory assistance
    *If the person hold a professional license *(lawyer, nurse, etc) you could search that.
    *Check real property records in that persons state
    *Pop their name in google: It really is amazing what you’ll discover.
    Here is a compliation of misc. links that may or maynot be helpful:

    And says “Intelius Is A Huge Waste Of Money”

    and “Intelius background checks are a fraud.”

    …Seems like she got information from a not so credible source.

  6. I hope CJ answers this allegation. Makuryente sana siya at ang tinatawag niyang Plaza Miranda. Nagpapaka-sensational itech!

      1. I’m not a troll. I’m referring my comment to the “investigative journalist” not to CJ. React ka nang react sa comment ng iba di mo naman naiintindihan what they mean!

        1. TROLL.

          Takot ka lang. You’re just paranoid due to your vindictiveness. Let’s see if he’ll do that.

          You just want to make yourself feel better.

        2. @vinzenso, katulad ka ng tito noy mo. speculative even without looking at the evidences. palibhasa sarado isip… may sistema ang defense team sa paglalahad ng kanilang ebidensiya… d nga ba, lumilitaw na from 45 ilan nalang ngayon? 21… and the count down doesn’t stop there… you idiot! wait for the right time at isusungalngal sa bunganga mo dollar accounts niya…

        3. We shouldn’t tolerate this uncle f**kers posts here. Vincenzo, you and your president are a blight on mankind and your words are as empty as your soul.
          Get a life you loser.

        4. Boo F**kin hoo, that statement is soooo stupid vincenzo. Pikon at asar talo ka tulad ng walang kwenta mong tito.

  7. Just read that CJ already answered the allegations. The reason why his name appeared in the search database is because he and his family rented homes in the US before and used it as their mailing address.

    It’s a valid explanation for me ewan ko lang kung tanggapin ito ng mga NOYNOYALIST at ni ms. raissa robles?

      1. Hehe, ganun din si Noynoy. The ‘Noyning’ thingy makes sense at all. He is ‘pakitang-tao’ personified.

        Stop spreading hearsays and conspiracy theories and crap, Vincenzo. 😛

        1. Spreading crap is the only thing vincenzo is good for…
          His tito noy on the other hand is only good for two things:

          Your stupid president’s days are numbered little boy!

      2. sana sinamahan mo sila way back kung saan lagi sila nagsisimba… d siya katulad ng tito noy mo na photo ops ang alam… teka, as far as i could remember, he doesn’t want photo ops, am i right? pero bakit ngayon, puro picture picture… NOYNOYING!

      3. And your precious president is making another titanic trick a liar ever did only to make him the truth with that impeachment nonsense.

  8. little green men also told robles that corona has property on mars.
    what a ludicrous person. an insult to intelligence and integrity.
    expect this mad woman ti gave mor made up ‘exclusives’ then back to being a nonentity when the trial is over.
    clearly sad and old i guess

      1. So what if he’s a midnight appointee? He’s still making a fair judgement as a Supreme Court judge jejemon. Your distorted mind is so somalian.

  9. Arche

    Sherlock Robles (directly or through intermediaries) could have simply called CJ Corona to verify the report, a journalistic imperative she purposely failed or neglected to pursue; although, as an “investigative journalist,” she was obligated to verify the “truthiness” of the allegations from CJ Corona himself who, I’m sure, was readily available for even a short phone interview.

    CJ Corona was the single most important individual who could have provided altogether the necessary explanation confirming or denying the veracity of the Report. But Robles, it seems, preferred not to contact CJ Corona nor did she even attempt to, for reasons most of us know. And this negligence reinforces what I think was the real reason behind Robles’ post–destroy now … apologize, if need be, later after the damage intended has been wrought.

    Hence, Robles’ apparent refusal or failure to seek CJ Corona’s side of the report shows an INTENT that is evidently “malicious,” to say the least.

      1. What??? I don’t understand what you’re saying jejemon. Pwede ba bumalik ka sa elementary. Palagi ka yata bagsak sa English at Filipino subjects e. You’re a disgrace to the intelligence of the Filipinos.

    1. Well, the question I posed regarding her activities were also rhetorical… a little way of getting back to our intrepid detective:

      1. What, again, was the intention of Robles and company in trying so hard to obtain sensitive information?

      2. Were they able to preserve the trust between Intelius and themselves, its clients?

      3. Did they consider the implications of the agency’s open admission of the uncertainty of the accuracy of the documents in their database?

      4. Did they consider the consequences of misinterpreting one’s reputation, especially that of the respondent, given the records obtained from the Internet?

      Of course, a rational mind would more or less know the answer to these questions. And you, my friend, have succinctly, and effectively, demonstrated the point I was trying to make. Indeed, what was her intention of trying to get such info?

      Attached to that question is if she considered the consequences of unjustly putting the respondent in a bad light by publishing news not verified by any credible authentication test (e.g., asking the respondent himself)?

      Since by close scrutiny we can arrive at a plausible conclusion, this brings me to my intention in writing this article; I just wanted to hold back a bit and give clues to readers on what might be really going on Robles’ mind.

      I’ve hinted on Robles’ ulterior motive on several parts of the article; her picture’s caption, the sentence, “After all, a journalist’s job is to inform, not to mystify.” It uh, adds to the mood of the article. Heh heh.

      Anyway, your input is greatly appreciated. Your reasoning is by all means sound. ^^

      1. Well, out of sheer curiosity, I just accessed the Intelius site and typed my name and some info; the result: A person under my name has lived in Oakland, CA, San Francisco, CA and Honolulu, HI.

        But I need to shell out a minimum of 95 cents just to get the basic additional data on DOB, phone number and address history or a max of $39.95 for what I suppose would be the complete CIA folder under may name.

        Well, at least the data the site provided is an accurate info when I lived there (like CJ Corona) temporarily–more than 20 long years ago.

      2. I have a question: Did she actually pay for the report from Intelius, or did she just look at the minor bit of information anyone can look at for free? Because it seems to me she did the latter, which means not only are her journalistic ethics seriously flawed, her work ethic is pretty half-assed as well.

        1. BenK

          Sherlock Robles’ disclosures of CJ Corona’s “properties” in the US (which she would have known was not actually Corona’s but merely his mailing address in the US) and her obviously now-abandoned “sense of decency” reminds of the Sen. MacCarthy-Atty Welch exchange during a Senate Hearing in 1954:

          “McCarthy accused Fred Fisher, one of the junior attorneys at Welch’s law firm, of associating while in law school with the National Lawyers Guild, a group which J. Edgar Hoover sought to have the U.S. Attorney General designate as a Communist front organization … before a nationwide television audience without prior warning or previous agreement to do so.”

          “Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty, or your recklessness…. Let us not assassinate this lad further, Senator… You’ve done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?

          “The gallery erupted in applause.”

          McCarthism anyone?

        2. Domingo,

          One must also oconsider this about McCarthy –

          “McCarthy Myth Exploded
          “History Books Will Have to be Rewritten”
          May 9, 2003

          By Toby Westerman
          Copyright 2003 International News Analysis Today

          The current portrayal of former U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy will have to be recast in light of new information arising from the release of secret files from the early 1950s, according to M. Stanton Evans, a respected dean of American journalism.

          Those seeking to weaken U.S. counter-espionage efforts often refer negatively to McCarthy, using terms including “McCarthy-era tactics,” “McCarthy-era witch hunts,” or “McCarthyism” to bolster their arguments.

          Evans’ statements were made during an exclusive interview with International News Analysis Today, and arose in response to questions concerning recently released transcripts from McCarthy’s closed-door hearings.

          Several news outlets characterized the 5,000 pages of hearing records as further damaging McCarthy’s image. Reuters declared that the released documents “add another layer of tarnish to his (McCarthy’s) place in history.” A Chicago Tribune headline referred to McCarthy as a “flag-draped U.S. bully.”

          Evans disputes these depictions of McCarthy, and states that the hearing transcripts “if actually read,” will provide “a very different view of McCarthy.”

          Additional information compelling a thorough reevaluation of McCarthy and his work is being released as the “fifty-year rule” ceases to be applicable to U.S. government archives. The “fifty-year rule” stipulates that sensitive government documents be kept secret for fifty years.

          Several historians are already at work, investigating materials pertinent to the history of the late 1940s and early 1950s – the era in which McCarthy gained prominence.

          The work of Herbert Romerstein and his analysis of the U.S. counter-espionage effort, the “Venona Project,” stands out as historical research clarifying the reality of Soviet spying in the U.S.

          Romerstein’s book, The Venona Secrets (Regnery Press), not only documents the wide extent of Soviet intelligence operations within the United States before and after WWII, but meticulously demonstrates Soviet penetration into the highest levels of the U.S. government and the administration of President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

          The work of Romerstein and others demonstrates that suspicions of communist infiltration in the U.S. were justified.

          Evans contacted several individuals who attacked McCarthy as the hearing transcripts were released, including Senator Carl Levin (D MI), and Senate historian Don Ritchie.

          To date, neither Levin nor Ritchie have provided a single instance of an innocent individual attacked or “ruined” by McCarthy, stated Evans.

          Although widely circulated, claims of McCarthy “bullying” are shown to be false when examined.

          Evans gave the example of Oscar Shaftel, a college professor whom The New York Times identified in an obituary as a victim of McCarthy. Shaftel refused to answer McCarthy’s questions, lost his position as professor, and lived out his years in difficult circumstances.

          The New York Times article, however, was incorrect on a number of vital details, most shockingly that McCarthy had nothing to do with Shaftel, who appeared before another Senate committee to which McCarthy did not belong, Evans stated to INA Today.

          Shaftel was also identified as a Communist operative by one of the professors at the college.

          Evans pointed out the errors in the Shaftel obituary to The New York Times, and after numerous attempts obtained a retraction. A retraction was finally published, but appeared on the Friday of the Labor Day holiday, tucked away among corrections concerning the misidentification of birds in Brooklyn, and the identities of Mexican politicians in a photograph.

          Evans wrote a detailed account of Shaftel’s obituary in the New York Times in an article entitled, “Media Myths and Joe McCarthy,” published in Human Events.

          While expressing his hope that a new generation of journalists will be “less invested in negative myths,” Evans urged all members of the press to adhere to “basic journalistic principles” and “get the facts straight.”

          Evans will shortly publish an article on the McCarthy closed-door hearing transcripts in Human Events, and he is writing a book on McCarthy and the controversies which developed around him.”

          I haven’t read the book. But then, I would really would like to have a discussion with somebody who’s very familiar with McCarthysm.

  10. Trosp

    There’s one popular victim of the McCarthyism era I know–the comedian Charles Chaplin, among several others.

    1. Domingo,

      For me, Chaplin is a victim Hooverism or HUACism (House Committee on Un-American Activities) rather than McCarthyism.

      As Chaplain has claimed:

      “Since the end of the last world war, I have been the object of lies and propaganda by powerful reactionary groups who, by their influence and by the aid of America’s yellow press, have created an unhealthy atmosphere in which liberal-minded individuals can be singled out and persecuted. Under these conditions I find it virtually impossible to continue my motion-picture work, and I have therefore given up my residence in the United States.”

      A good reading for those who are interested on the other side of McCarthy –

      1. Trosp, just finished reading the Sniegoski article, thanks!

        I think the problem really here is the perception that, as Wiki aptly states it, “the word McCarthyism has entered American speech as a general term for a variety of practices: aggressively questioning a person’s patriotism, making poorly supported accusations, using accusations of disloyalty to pressure a person to adhere to conformist politics or to discredit an opponent, subverting civil rights in the name of national security, and the use of demagoguery are all often referred to as McCarthyism. McCarthyism can also be synonymous with the term witch-hunt, both referring to mass hysteria and moral panic.”

        Indeed, the excesses of BOTH sides of the aisle helped destroy the reputations of several Americans–Sen. McCarthy and the Comedian Charlie Chaplin as among those from both sides.

        But changing that perception of what the general term “McCarthyism” connotes as, for instance , “synonymous with the term witch-hunt” would, I think, be very difficult now, having already, to repeat, “entered American speech.”

        Well, as an aside, one of the court cases involving the HUAC (that Sen. McCarthy headed) was Watkins v. U.S. (1957): “In 1954, John Watkins, a labor organizer, was called upon to testify in hearings conducted by the House Committee on Un-American Activities.”

        I became interested in this case early on owing to its relevancy to our own Senate “power of inquiry,” particularly this part of the opinion:

        “But, broad as is this power of inquiry, it is not unlimited. There is no general authority to expose the private affairs of individuals without justification in terms of the functions of the Congress … Nor is the Congress a law enforcement or trial agency. These are functions of the executive and judicial departments of government. No inquiry is an end in itself; it must be related to, and in furtherance of, a legitimate task of the Congress. Investigations conducted solely for the personal aggrandizement of the investigators or to “punish” those investigated are indefensible.” (see 354 U.S. 187)

        1. Domingo, aside from benign0 to whom I’m always delighted to have an insightful discussion, you’re also one of the most objective commenter in this blog that I know I could learn a lot.

          About McCarthy heading the HUAC, according to Wiki:

          “The committee’s anti-Communist investigations are often confused with those of Senator Joseph McCarthy.[3] McCarthy, as a U.S. Senator, had no direct involvement with this House committee.[4] McCarthy was the Chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Government Operations Committee of the U.S. Senate, not the House.”

        2. Trosp, yes, you’re right, thanks, again!

          Sorry for inserting the phrase in parentheses “headed by Sen. McCarthy.” Actually, the committee was chaired at that time in 1954 by Rep. Harold Himmel Velde, and I mistook the investigation as having been conducted by a “joint committee” of both the House and Senate.

          Wiki, in fact, reminds readers of this confusion:

          “The committee’s [HUAC’s] anti-Communist investigations are often confused with those of Senator Joseph McCarthy. McCarthy, as a U.S. Senator, had no direct involvement with this House committee, McCarthy was the Chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Government Operations Committee of the U.S. Senate, not the House.”

          This confusion, of course, is traceable to HUAC’s association with what was then the Yippie movement of the mid 60s when the committee subpoenaed the leaders of the party (Youth Internationa Party or YIP) in 1968 and again in 1971, using “media attention to make a mockery of the proceedings.”

          In fact, “The Yippies were the first on the New Left to make a point of exploiting mass media. Colorful, theatrical Yippie actions were tailored to attract media coverage, and also to provide a stage where people could express the ‘repressed’ Yippie inside them.”

          Anyway, that short “history” only goes to show how old I am now!

  11. The sleeping president is ignoring the critical issues like fuel price increases, LPG price increases, tuition fee increases, transport fare increases and the rising prices of basic commodities. This has triggered a “social” response from the militant left. They have even coined a term called “noynoying” which is now viral. The fault lies with the sleeping president. His lack of solutions and immediate response have given free propaganda mileage to the militant left. They are exploiting the situation to their advantage. The militant left now appears as red crusaders while the sleeping president’s image is shot down at the expense of freedom and democracy.

    1. The anti-Communist McCarthyism of the past is now replaced by the noynoying of the present. The sleeping president’s lack of political skill and leadership is now seen as promoting the propaganda and political cause of the militant left. In other words, his slow response, lack of brilliant advisers and his own eccentric nuances is building the image of the militant legal support front of the left. With his leadership style, the reds don’t need to exert much effort to promote their anti-democracy goal which is to destroy the image and the structure of established democratic government. His very acts and omissions are promoting sedition and rebellion. With his style, who needs rebels?

  12. but guys, anything we say are all for naught because inspite of the shameless economic conditions of the Filipinos, the noynoying penoy still enjoys 78% approval rating according to the relatives’ owned pulse asia. Can’t you believe that? it must be really, really great fun in the Philippines despite hunger, poverty, high crimes of kidnapping and killings, etc., the noynoying president is still well-loved.

    1. @JohnPaul

      News headlines …

      “Corona changes story on California property”

      Can he really be trusted?

      Can those “News headlines” really be trusted?

      Or better yet, can you really be trusted? Surely not abNoynoy and his KKKKs.

  13. News update …

    “Senator-Judge Juan Ponce Enrile has performed the difficult task of presiding officer with enormous patience, skill, and wisdom. Lately, however, the senator appears to have succumbed to the cries of those who demand Corona’s head. Instead of keeping his opinions to himself and to the caucuses of the tribunal, he has been making public pronouncements that sound partisan.

    Senator Enrile has gone on record to insist that the chief justice should appear before the tribunal and explain his bank accounts. This decision should be left entirely to Corona and to his defense team.”

    Thank you JPE for siding with the TRUTH. You are a noble man.
    – The Filipino People

    1. Nah. He’s unbiased and he even scolded the prosecution panel for their stupidity. So Enrile wasn’t siding with the “truth” that you spoke up if you thought that Corona being guilty is one of them; what he wants is ORDER and a FAIR TRIAL. He will never tolerate stupidity just like you always do. If you want the truth, then everything

      The “truth” of yours is nothing but a lie. You just want to make yourself feel better so spouting all of this nonsense is more like a spam.

      Request for deletion please.

  14. Although I agree that all these corrupt politicians must pay it seems that all this energy on bringing these scalawags to justice is like chasing after a poisonous snake after it has bitten you. Lets suck out the poison and treat the wound first ( national problems such as economy recovery etc) before we play tag with the snake or else the poison will spread and kill us

    1. Abs-cbn exposes raissa robles lies.
      The stupid propagandist is now being hung out to dry. What a surprise! karma, and no doubt no contract renewal!
      The tide is turning against p-noy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.