The world of Philippine politics and showbiz recently collided in a spectacle of scandal and ambition, centered around actor and former Eat Bulaga host Anjo Yllana and veteran Senator Tito Sotto. What began as a surprising public feud has quickly spiraled into a political controversy, with one prominent commentator alleging that Yllana’s attacks are not about principle or honesty, but a calculated, desperate bid for a Senate seat in the 2028 elections. This explosive claim suggests that Yllana is willing to burn bridges and violate professional loyalties in a transparent grab for political visibility.

The Scourge of Scandal: Burning Bridges for Votes
Anjo Yllana’s recent behavior has perplexed and angered many, leading the commentator to question if the actor is “possessed by an evil spirit.” His public crusade against Senator Tito Sotto began with personal attacks, delivered with alarming intensity. Beyond criticizing Sotto’s political alliances, Yllana hurled sensational, unverified accusations concerning the private lives of Sotto and his Eat Bulaga colleagues, particularly Vic Sotto.

The gravity of Yllana’s allegations is evident in the detailed rumor-mongering reported by the commentator: “He’s allegedly cheating, Tito Sen has a mistress in Eat Bulaga, and that mistress is also allegedly Bossing Vic’s girlfriend, and they were surprised. And Bossing Vic and Tito Sen allegedly share the same girlfriend—just one woman.” Such salacious rumors, targeting the highly respected TV personalities who once employed Yllana, are seen not as exposing truth, but as a deliberate attempt to generate maximum controversy and notoriety.

The motivation, according to the commentator, is simple and cynical: Yllana is leveraging his former network connections and the DDS (Diehard Duterte Supporter) movement to launch his political career. The evidence? Yllana “applied to be DDS on live stream… He applied to be a DDS and he wants to be a Senator in 2028. He wants to file his candidacy for Senator under the ticket of VP Inday Sara Duterte.” This self-declaration on a public platform exposes the calculated nature of his crusade, transforming the personal feud into a strategic audition for a spot on the 2028 senatorial slate.

Integrity Under Fire: A Friend’s Betrayal
To further dismantle Yllana’s credibility, the commentator brought up a disturbing incident concerning Yllana’s relationship with his long-time friend, Joey de Leon. Yllana once expressed profound affection for de Leon, citing their long history together. However, the commentator revealed a shocking act that profoundly questioned Yllana’s personal integrity and loyalty.

“In the other video, he said he loves Joey de Leon because they were together in Balakubak. Because of Anjo Yllana’s great love, the painting, the clown painting that Henyo Master Joey de Leon gave Anjo, Anjo, because of his great love for Henyo Master Joey de Leon, sold the painting… that’s how Anjo Yllana loves a friend. He sold what was given to him to make money. So intense.”

The selling of a priceless, personalized gift—an original clown painting created and given by Joey de Leon—is framed as the ultimate act of betrayal and desperation. This incident serves as a powerful metaphor for Yllana’s current political tactics: if he is willing to sell a precious token of friendship for money, he is likely willing to sell his professional loyalties and personal relationships for political power. The commentator concludes that this lack of loyalty suggests his political attacks are driven by a singular, self-serving objective.

The Absurdity of the Political Rant
The core of the commentator’s argument rests on the absurdity and incoherence of Yllana’s public reasoning for his attack on Sotto. Yllana claimed his opposition to Sotto stems from the Senator’s alliance with the Marcos administration, which Yllana asserts is “the most corrupt government” he has ever experienced.

The commentator sharply challenged this logic, arguing that Yllana’s personal attacks are irrelevant to his political criticism: “You said you don’t like Tito Sen because Tito Sen is allied with this government that you don’t like, right? So what does it have to do with the mistresses you’re talking about? Is there a connection there?”

This retort perfectly exposes the political opportunism at play. If the issue is corruption, the Senator’s alleged personal life is immaterial. By dragging personal drama into a political critique, Yllana demonstrates that his goal is to smear and sensationalize, rather than engage in substantive debate.

Furthermore, the commentator challenged Yllana’s political philosophy, questioning his capacity for independent thought and tolerance: “Does Tito Sen not have his own decision? And if you don’t like his preference, you will stop being friends with him? Is that the kind of person you are?” The argument here highlights a dangerous political intolerance, where personal relationships must be sacrificed if political views do not align.

The ‘Stooge’ Showdown: Political Employment and Loyalty
The commentator also introduced the shocking, unverified rumor that Yllana currently works for Senator Jinggoy Estrada, a colleague of Sotto in the Senate. This potential conflict of interest was used to question Yllana’s claims of being a “stooge of the people.”

The commentator’s pointed questions exposed the uncomfortable irony: “Are you working for Senator Jinggoy Estrada until now? … And does Senator Jinggoy Estrada not watch you attacking his Senate colleague? Doesn’t this hurt Senator Jingoy Estrada? Unless he allows you and he likes what you’re doing. So, whose stooge are you?”

This setup traps Yllana in a loyalty bind: either his attacks are sanctioned by his current employer, suggesting political warfare; or Yllana is acting alone, risking the ire of his alleged boss. The commentator uses this opportunity to mock Yllana’s self-declaration: “If I am a stooge, I am a stooge of the people. I am a stooge of the poor people who were robbed by this administration.” This attempt to claim moral high ground is severely undermined by the persistent questions about his own professional and political loyalties.

Transparency vs. Secrecy: Defending the Marcos Administration
Finally, the commentator used Yllana’s claim of opposing the “most corrupt” Marcos administration to launch a defense of the current government’s transparency regarding corruption, contrasting it sharply with the previous regime’s perceived secrecy.

The defense of the Marcos administration is rooted in action: “Don’t you forget, Mr. Anjo Yllana, this Marcos administration is the only one among all of them that launched an investigation… Why do you say this Marcos administration is the most corrupt? Because it is being revealed now, it is being investigated by PBBM.” The argument posits that the Marcos government is being called “most corrupt” only because it is allowing these issues to surface and be investigated, a practice allegedly absent during the previous term.

The commentator then launched a searing critique of the Duterte administration’s handling of corruption and accountability: “Unlike Digong, where he had a press conference when he was president, he admitted there were anomalies… But after that press conference… he did not launch any investigation.” Furthermore, the commentator revealed major corruption issues that allegedly remained hidden during Duterte’s time, including the discovery of P600 billion “sleeping in PhilHealth” and the transfer of large DOH funds to another agency, allegedly burying allies like Bong Go. The commentator asked: “Was that revealed during that time? No. Where did we find out? Here.”

This final juxtaposition of governments suggests that the transparency of the Marcos administration, though politically risky, is morally superior to the perceived cover-ups and unchecked corruption of the past. Yllana’s political positioning, therefore, is viewed not as a fight against corruption, but as a strategic alignment with a political dynasty that the commentator views as fundamentally flawed. Yllana’s attempt to “use” the DDS movement to launch his career is thus dismissed as a cynical, transparent, and ultimately “failure” of a senatorial bid.