Transcript of the above video: 

Here recently, just as a preface to the upcoming rest of this video, we have been, or I should say, I have been kind of spreading my wings on this channel with regard to getting more into political, sort of following some aspects of politics insofar as it has legal ramifications and trying to kind of provide clarification to, especially English language speakers, as to what exactly is going on over here.

The fact is Thai Parliamentary procedures and certain aspects of Thai Law, especially as it pertains to different institutions, it can become very picayune with regard to the law in place, regarding how different institutions interact and the procedurally proper course of action with regard to challenging certain aspects of the political process etc. And to outsiders, it is kind of like years ago when I started this channel, one of the big reasons I did it was because like the Thai Visa Forum comes to mind immediately, although they weren't the only culprit and it's not their fault, it was a forum, there were people on it, but people would talk about Immigration and they would make just a lot of broad nonsensical statements about, "well this is why they're doing this". Well it wouldn't be. It was a lot of misinformation basically. I hear a lot of that kind of stuff in like expat circles, when I hear expats talking, "well this is why this is happening", and it's like no, no there's more nuance to it. If you understand sort of the underlying mechanics, you can understand what's going on. Also I find it helpful to analogize things from my base of knowledge with American, sometimes British, sometimes European, but with American analogies in order to provide context for what is going on over here, because again when you see sort of the mainstream English language press talking about developments, it kind of can gloss over again some of the nuance and it leaves Anglos, like English language speakers who are reading about this stuff, not necessarily uninformed or misinformed, but they're not getting the full breadth of what's going on. It just looks like, "oh these people are just fighting; it's just politics." Well it might not be. There might be discreet legal issues at play that have a genuine reason for being at play. For example, in the Thai Constitutional System, there are effectively what we would call checks and balances in place with regard to different institutions within the system. For example as we'll get into in this video, the Senate versus the House versus folks that are in the Cabinet, and then political players that are then operating vis a vis all these different institutions, and filing petitions, filing cases before the Courts - Constitutional Court or otherwise - and these players each have their own contentions with regard to how the dynamics, the mechanism if you will of these different institutions should interplay; how the checks and balances should work effectively. Or they disregard the checks and balances for their own ends, possibly for their own ends I should say, and again I think it's worth pointing out when it looks like operators are doing that. 

So another thing to bear in mind before I jump right into all of this, I do get into deeper dives with regard to this and how this news and these developments have an impact on the expat world sort of Expat Thailand if you want to call it that, the Foreigner Community here in Thailand, I get into that in our paid news service, you can email us, [email protected], we get into that. For more information you can email us again, [email protected] for how to get on the mailing list with regard to the paid news service. Also, while I'm talking, I might as well bring it up. We have set up a restaurant, my better half and I, here in downtown Bangkok. It's called Pancake Palace; it is American Diner style food. As the name implies, it's breakfast anytime including pancakes, but we also have chilli bowls, buffalo wings, cheeseburgers, hamburgers, pork chops. We've got glass bottled Coke, all of that good stuff. If you're interested in having some American Diner style food in downtown Bangkok, check out the links in the description below for the location of Pancake Palace. 

Now I want to jump into this, so what are we talking about with regard to a "Smoking Gun". Okay first of all I think it's wise to go ahead and give context to this; I'm not talking about a literal firearm here. What I am talking about, coming from Wikipedia, wikipedia.org, under the Nixon White House tapes and The Smoking Gun tape, quoting directly: "The White House released the subpoena tapes on August 5. One tape, later known as the "Smoking Gun" tape, documented the initial stages of the Watergate coverup. On it, Nixon and Haldeman are heard formulating a plan to block investigations by having the CIA falsely claim to the FBI that National Security was involved." And to provide context on that, Nixon got embroiled in this political tit for tat if you will and he knew that investigators were coming after these tapes that they had made in the White House and so as a result of that, and this is the key point, he directed a different agency - i.e. the CIA as opposed to the FBI - to take control of the investigation citing National Security. And where this again it's not an apples-to-apples comparison of what we are going to be talking about herein, but the crux of the analysis, the crux of the analogy is that Nixon was intentionally picking an investigatory agency that he believed was more sympathetic to him, and did it in an improper manner which is what led to his resignation and the investigation that led thereto and possibly his impeachment if that would have gone forward. But the point is, he was looking for an investigatory body that was going to be sympathetic to him in regard to the investigation that was against him. He was trying to sort of shift it to an institution that you could maybe say he "controlled" more, but he had more influence over or might have been more sympathetic to his interest and that was the problem in the Smoking Gun tapes, and that was the reason it was called the Smoking Gun because that was improper for him to do.

I bring this up because I have seen this stuff the Bangkok Post regarding this issue of the investigation regarding the senate election and all of this and I'll get into this in a moment, but I think it's important that English language speakers, especially those that are familiar with sort of the American political history if you will, to understand the sort of analogy. Again, it is not a one-to-one comparison, but what I am getting at is there seems to be this allegation that one investigatory agency, in this case the DSI, which I will get into here in a moment, as opposed to the Election Commission was utilized in this and that that was improper. So let me dig into this deeper. I thought of making this video after reading a recent article from the Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com, the article is titled: Acting PM not bothered by court case. Now, again the reason for the thumbnail with the "What Me Worry", the old Alfred E.  Newman line, and I'll get into here in a moment, I have noted that at this current “acting” Prime Minister, and it's important to note, he is the acting Prime Minister in lieu of the suspended Prime Minister who is currently suspended pending an adjudication by the Constitutional Court which took up the case in a 9 to 0 decision to take on the case and suspended her in a 7 to 2 decision because of her alleged improper communications with a foreign potentate, with a foreign, in this case Hun Sen over in Cambodia. I've gone into that at length in other videos. No point really rehashing that, but understand he is the acting PM. Meanwhile, as I discussed in other videos, in one instance the Council of State came out and said Hey, the acting PM cannot dissolve the House, and he just sort of said "well that's one opinion!" Meanwhile, that's exactly what the Council of State is supposed to do is issue opinions regarding the parameters of the Office of the Prime Minister, and I have my serious concerns about, as I have discussed in other videos, Mr. Phumtham is a Communist, you can say former, I don't know what's in his mind, but I cited that in other videos. I have serious concerns about this “Core” Coalition Party and their relationship with the World Economic Forum. The now suspended Prime Minister had a meeting with some envoy from the World Economic Forum in the Purple Room; we discussed that in other videos. I have serious concerns about all of this because these are the kind of Bolshevik style sort of tactics that the World Economic Forum seems to like to utilize where they sort of hold on to little, you could even call them institutional or legal or political, sort of tiny little hooks if you will, that they can hang their hat on to sort of maintain some sort of grip on power, to radically influence different countries' Governments, not in favour of the people within those countries and while disregarding institutional safeguards that basically act as checks and balances to safeguard the liberties of the populations over which they govern, they seem to like to disregard those kind of things. So it concerned me a lot when Mr. Phumtham just said, "oh yeah, the Council of State said I can't dissolve the House. Well that's just their opinion." Well yeah, they are the ones that issue those opinions; that's the point of them. They are the institution that issues opinions regarding the parameters of the Office of the Prime Minister, and I find it very concerning when somebody who is acting Prime Minister - not someone who was on the slate of folks who were slated as possible Prime Ministerial candidates pursuant to the procedure associated with electing Parliament and installing Parliament - he's not on that list, he's just acting in an acting capacity while the current PM is suspended pending a pretty serious adjudication as to her conduct in Office. And this person has been let's say flippant, with opinions issued by Institutions pertaining to the parameters of his Office, if only in an acting capacity. 

That said, quoting directly, again Acting PM not bothered by court case. "Interior Minister Phumtham Wechayachai has brushed off concerns about the Constitutional Court's request for a witness list in a case alleging his interference in the Senate vote-rigging investigation, insisting he did nothing wrong." Now let's go over real quick here too the context of this. What are we talking about with regard to this? Going over here to Thai PBS World, that is world.thaipbs.or.th. The title of the article is: Phumtham defense DSI's investigation of alleged collusion in Senate election. Quoting directly: "Defence Minister Phumtham Wechayachai.." - now this was when he was Defence Minister. We have since had a Cabinet reshuffle and then the Prime Minister has been suspended, he moved over to Interior - which I have already made videos about my concerns about his activities therein - and the I believe Defence Ministry now sits vacant, which why is that? I have my questions about that. That said, he was Defence Minister as of the time of this video. Quoting further: "..said today that the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) has collected sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegation made by some failed senatorial candidates," - I think that is a fair point. One big thing to take away from this is the politicization of all of this "investigation" regarding the Senate. I am not getting into the merits of it. I don't know who did what, where, but the whole investigation itself seem to be a response to how maybe certain parties didn't like the way that the entire thing shook out and the current makeup of the Senate. That is one possibility, that is my speculation, but it looks to me like it is possible there. That said, quoting further: "..that the Senate election last June was riddled with collusion." You know, I constantly, I remember reading a book years ago about New York City politics and Tammany Hall, and that apparently in Tammany Hall there was a plaque up in there somewhere, and Tammany Hall was the "political machine" if you will in New York City at the time. It ran it for a number of years even up into the modern era. Apparently, there was a plaque inside of Tammany Hall that said, "Take everything, concede nothing and if defeated, allege fraud." It kind of seems, what was it Mark Twain said. "History doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes." I kind of feel like some rhyming is going on here. That said, quoting further: "The DSI's special case committee, headed by Phumtham," - again, headed by Phumtham. So this is the DSI that he headed the investigation of, worth pointing out - "is scheduled to meet Tuesday to decide whether to accept the allegation as a special case for further investigation by the DSI. Phumtham insisted that any DSI investigation is not politically motivated," - quoting further: "but just a legal process to examine the allegation, as he claimed that the Election Commission has asked the DSI to treat the matter as a special case. Meanwhile, Senate whips held a closed-door meeting this morning, to discuss the DSI's move. Off to the meeting, Senate Speaker Mongkol Surasajja told the media that neither the DSI nor the Justice Ministry have the authority to investigate the Senate, which rests with the EC, according to the Constitution." 

So that is the important thing is what's being alleged here in the issue of this DSI investigation is that no one is that the Senate is its own institution, and the Constitution speaks directly to the Senate's parameters, let's call it that. And that it's improper for the DSI, which by the way the DSI's investigation again was headed by Mr. Phumtham, in the aftermath of an election, and he said it wasn't politically motivated but it's hard for me to see how it wouldn't have been, if not for the outcome, why would there have been the investigation? But fine, that was what he claimed, but what I am saying here, and what's being said here and what I feel needs to be understood is that per the Constitution, it's apparently it is my understanding improper, for anybody other than the Election Commission to investigate such matters, okay. That is sort of the issue at hand and it comes back to again where Mr. Phumtham headed the investigation, again therein lies in sort of the analogy back to the Smoking Gun tapes, and sort of Nixon's motive if you will for wanting to have a different institution deal with the “matter”, the whole investigation regarding Watergate, under the belief that it would have been more sympathetic to his interest, and that seems to be the crux of the allegations here, is the DSI was used instead of the proper institution, the apparently proper institution of the Election Commission which is the one that's supposed to do such things but the DSI was being used. Again the allegation seems to be that it was being used because it was more sympathetic, or maybe because it was being controlled; again it depends on how you look at that allegation.

That said, quoting further. So going back again, now we're going back to Bangkok Post article, throw this back on screen. Acting PM not bothered by Court case. Quoting further: "Mr. Phumtham, also acting Prime Minister, was responding on Friday to questions about the Court's request that he and Justice Minister Tawee Sodsong submit witness lists within 15 days. The case dates back to March, when 92 Senators petitioned the Court to rule on whether the two Ministers’ roles should be terminated because of interference in the vote-rigging investigation." Quoting further: "Specifically, they are accused of recommending that the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) look into allegations of irregularities in the June 2024 polls. They maintain that only the Election Commission is authorised to do so." Again, getting back to the analogy, again not a one-to-one comparison but it's sort of akin to the whole switching from the FBI to the CIA in the “Smoking Gun tapes” of the Watergate investigation. I want to point that out because that provides sort of a touchstone in sort of the American paradigm especially as it pertains to sort of legal thinking as to something to then be able to use when analyzing what's going on over here. That said, quoting further: "I still do not even know what I am accused of," Mr. Phumtham said on Friday. "I was not involved in the vote-rigging case. It is a matter for the DSI and the Senate to deal with." Well as we just pointed out there, at least from Thai PBS World, I read, quote: "The DSI special case committee headed by Phumtham is scheduled to meet Tuesday." So I don't know what's going on there but that was what was reported by Thai PBS World. Quoting further: "He said his only involvement was chairing a DSI board meeting." Your only involvement? I mean, you know! Quoting further: "During that meeting, differing views were expressed about whether the case should proceed." But it did proceed. Quoting further: Quote: "Opinions were split", so he suggested pausing for a week to allow further consideration." Well, this is where I get again concerned, because okay opinions were split. What? Between yours and everybody else's? Again where we have somebody who, this is on the record, has Communistic or had Communist affiliations, there seems to be a running theme of disregarding institutional opinions especially where there's checks and balances involved regarding the parameters of different political actors conduct where basically hey, you're not able to do that; that is beyond the scope of your ability. "Oh, I don’t care!" Again, we saw this with the Council of State. Council of State said, "hey the acting PM does not have power to dissolve Parliament” - I'll put the article on screen that said that, but they don't have the authority to do that, he just said, "well that's one opinion among many, that's just your opinion". 

Again, I remember going back into the COVID thing at sort of the end of the COVID thing when it seemed like Mr. Tedros over at the WHO, which I'll get into the WHO in another video, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. back in the United States has just basically said, we are out of all of this and out of the international treaties and everything, probably because of all the weird conduct especially Mr. Tedros during the whole COVID thing. Going back to that, I won't digress too far into that but with Mr. Tedros, I brought this up at the time, where there was a body that was convened with the WHO where they were trying to determine whether monkeypox should be declared a pandemic. The Board said no, a majority of the Board said no, he just overrode it, and it was technically declared a pandemic notwithstanding the Board saying no. And by the way, why am I bringing up Tedros? Tedros is a Communist as well, okay? He was a Communist back in I believe Ethiopia, okay. You can even get into his history if you like.

But my point is and as I have discussed in other videos, this seems to be a running trend of just ignoring institutional opinions, institutional rulings regarding the parameters of conduct, the parameters of duties and powers associated with different Offices, who just say, "well that's their opinion, I don't care" basically  seems to be the operative language and that's the reason for this video where it's just,  “oh well different opinions were expressed” but yet the investigation proceeded. So I don't know how all of this is going to play out. We will certainly keep you updated on this channel as the situation evolves.