THE TROLL NETWORK DEFENDING SARA DUTERTE IS WORKING OVERTIME

I want Sara Duterte held accountable for any offense proven through lawful proceedings. If the Senate convicts her and imposes disqualification after a fair trial, then I want that constitutional penalty enforced. I do not want someone found unfit to hold public office becoming president of an already downtrodden country.

She is still entitled to due process. The prosecution must prove its charges. Her lawyers must be allowed to challenge the evidence, question the witnesses and present her defense.

That same demand for evidence should apply to the people defending her online.

FALSEHOODS MADE TO LOOK LIKE NEWS

The fake news defending Sara Duterte is no longer confined to anonymous accounts posting angry comments.

It is coming from pages with names designed to resemble news organizations. They publish cards marked “BREAKING NEWS,” use photographs of politicians and lawyers, attribute statements to recognizable people and present invented claims using the visual language of journalism.

Some posts use artificial intelligence. Others use altered images, edited clips or completely fabricated quotations.

One fake card becomes ten reposts. Ten reposts become hundreds of comments. After enough repetition, people stop asking where the claim came from.

THE FAKE DUTERTE VIDEO

On September 23, VERA Files reported that a video showing former president Rodrigo Duterte asking Filipinos to pray for and support his daughter was AI-manipulated.

The original upload identified the video as AI-generated satire. A pro-Duterte TikTok account reposted it about two hours later without that warning. When VERA Files published its report, that copy had already received more than 209,000 views and 21,566 engagements.

Viewers encountering the repost were seeing what appeared to be a genuine appeal from Rodrigo Duterte. Here was an aging father, then appearing before the International Criminal Court, supposedly asking supporters to rally behind his daughter.

Except he did not make that appeal.

THE INVENTED JOEL CHUA QUOTE

Another card falsely quoted House prosecutor Joel Chua as saying that congressmen did not care if the country’s money ran out, so long as Sara Duterte was removed and her brothers were imprisoned.

VERA Files traced the altered card to an authentic discussion involving Chua. The statement attributed to him did not appear in that discussion, nor was there any official record of him saying it.

At least 15 copies of the false card collectively received about 49,000 reactions, 17,513 comments and 5,046 shares when VERA Files counted them.

It did not need to be real. It only needed Chua’s photograph, quotation marks and a news-looking layout.

THE INVENTED MICHAEL POA QUOTE

The same tactic was used against Michael Poa, a lawyer for Sara Duterte.

A page calling itself Central Luzon News Update attributed a hostile statement to Poa attacking House prosecutor Terry Ridon. Poa denied making it. VERA Files found no public record supporting the quotation.

The page had previously carried the name SMNI News North Central Luzon. That history gave it the appearance of a regional news outlet even after its name had changed.

The false statement was reproduced in other graphics and circulated by additional pages. The person being impersonated was part of Sara Duterte’s own defense team. Even that did not stop them from manufacturing a quotation under his name.

FALSE CLAIMS ABOUT THE COST OF THE TRIAL

Disinformation also spread about how much the impeachment proceedings supposedly cost taxpayers.

Posts claimed that the trial cost ₱25 million, ₱70 million or even ₱600 million. Some took the Senate’s ordinary daily operating cost and presented it as money spent exclusively on Sara Duterte’s trial.

Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian said the Senate incurred no additional expense from conducting the trial because it was handled like a plenary session. He also said the prosecution and defense paid for their own food, printing and internet expenses.

VERA Files reported that lawyer Yvette Contacto, identified as PDP-Laban’s national legal affairs chairperson, publicly repeated the unsupported ₱70-million-per-day figure. Harry Roque and several pages also circulated versions of the ₱25-million claim.

A lawyer says it. A former official reposts it. A page converts it into a graphic. Supporters then repeat it as though an official accounting document exists.

No such document supported those daily figures.

A CLEAN AUDIT OPINION DOES NOT END THE QUESTION

Another line used to defend Sara Duterte is that the Office of the Vice President received an unmodified audit opinion from the Commission on Audit.

COA explains that an unmodified opinion concerns whether financial statements are fairly presented. It does not certify that every transaction complied with every law, nor does it declare an agency free from corruption.

COA also affirmed a notice of disallowance covering approximately ₱73.28 million in OVP confidential expenditures from December 2022. State auditors said the documents submitted did not sufficiently support the questioned spending under the rules governing confidential funds.

A notice of disallowance is not a criminal conviction. It also cannot honestly be erased by citing the general audit opinion.

THE GRACIOSO ALLEGATION

Former police officer Rodulfo Gracioso has alleged that more than ₱2 billion was delivered to Sara Duterte through more than 20 transactions.

Sara Duterte denied knowing him or receiving the money. The camp of former House speaker Lord Allan Velasco also rejected Gracioso’s claims. His dismissal from the Philippine National Police for grave misconduct is relevant when assessing his credibility.

NBI Director Melvin Matibag reportedly said portions of Gracioso’s statements had been checked through other means. The supporting evidence has not been released in full for public examination.

I will not present his entire account as proven. Investigators and prosecutors must connect it to documents, witnesses, financial records or other independent evidence. His allegations should be investigated seriously, and his credibility should be tested just as seriously.

ACCOUNTABILITY CAN ALSO BE ORGANIZED

I suspect there is an organized political and legal effort to hold Sara Duterte accountable and prevent her from becoming president.

I see nothing inherently wrong with that, provided the effort uses credible evidence and lawful proceedings.

The line is crossed when evidence is fabricated, witnesses are coached to lie, public officials are threatened or institutions are pressured to reach a predetermined result. If anyone seeking her conviction does those things, that conduct should also be exposed.

I want Sara Duterte stopped from becoming president through the Constitution and credible evidence. A dishonest conviction would damage the same institutions tasked with holding her accountable.

WHAT I SEE ONLINE

I have no evidence that Sara Duterte personally directs these accounts. I also cannot prove that every page answers to one operator.

What I see is repeated content, common targets, copied language, synchronized amplification and a steady supply of fabricated material serving the same political purpose. I see supposedly personal accounts, news-looking pages, political personalities and people presented as legal authorities helping questionable claims travel farther.

I consider that a political influence operation.

The result is an online defense system that can manufacture doubt faster than fact-checkers can correct it.

FAKE NEWS CANNOT DECIDE THE CASE

Trolls can harass witnesses, attack prosecutors and flood comment sections. They cannot lawfully acquit Sara Duterte through Facebook reactions.

They cannot convert a fabricated quote card into sworn testimony or an AI-generated video into a genuine statement from Rodrigo Duterte. They cannot erase records properly authenticated and admitted during the proceedings.

The impeachment case belongs to the Senate. Any separate criminal or administrative case belongs to the institution given authority by law. None should answer to the Dutertes, the Marcoses or an online mob.

KEEP GOING, BUT DO IT LAWFULLY

I support the continued investigation of Sara Duterte. Examine the confidential funds. Question the people involved. Test the witness accounts. Follow the money wherever the records lead.

If the prosecution cannot prove its charges, she should not be convicted. If the evidence proves them and the Senate convicts her, then the constitutional penalties should follow, including disqualification if the Senate imposes it.

Let the trolls work overtime.

So long as the officials handling these cases remain free from Duterte influence, Marcos influence and pressure from online mobs, no volume of trolling can lawfully clear Sara Duterte.

If the evidence proves the charges, hold her accountable. If the Senate convicts her and imposes disqualification, keep her away from Malacañang.

The country should never apologize for imposing a lawful consequence after a fair trial.