The nation’s political landscape has been rocked by a seismic new video, a “Part 2” exposé from the man at the center of the controversial 100 billion budget insertion, Zaldico. In a detailed and explosive testimonial, Zaldico has not only confirmed prior allegations but has escalated the scandal to the highest levels of power, directly implicating President Bongbong Marcos and Speaker Martin Romualdez in a massive kickback operation.

The core of the allegation is staggering: a 25% “SOP” (Standard Operating Procedure) on the 100 billion insertion, amounting to 25 billion, was allegedly funneled directly to President Marcos himself.

This new video, which has spread like wildfire across social media, serves as a direct confirmation of claims made by another figure, Orle Goteza. Zaldico’s testimony now publicly validates Goteza, stating unequivocally that Goteza “is not lying.” This development has cast a shadow over political figures like Senator Ping Lacson and former Senate President Vicente Sotto, as well as the initial findings of the Blue Ribbon Committee, who had previously appeared skeptical of Goteza’s claims. With Zaldico himself now corroborating the story, the narrative has been violently upended.

The Anatomy of the Alleged Operation
According to Zaldico’s video testimony, the 100 billion budget insertion was not a rogue operation. He claims he was instructed to make the insertion and that the entire process had the full approval of the President.

“I informed the Speaker and asked about instructions from the President,” Zaldico stated in his video. “He said, ‘We can’t do anything about it.’”

Zaldico expressed confusion as to why the President would publicly deny knowledge of the budget’s contents when, according to him, Budget Secretary Amenah Pangandaman sought approval from the President for every single item that was reduced or added.

In one of the video’s most stunning claims, Zaldico alleges that before the bicameral conference committee finalized the budget, Senator Chiz Escudero was informed, “Everything is cleared with the president. The important thing is that the funds requested by the president are included. Because what the president wants, the president gets.”

Zaldico claims that after the budget’s approval, the President was described as “happy” because his desired 100 billion insertion was successfully included, even at the cost of budget cuts to other government agencies.

The “Smoking Gun”: Suitcases to Forbes Park and Malacañang
The most shocking part of the testimony involves the alleged delivery of the funds. Zaldico claims that he and his team, including individuals named Paul Estrada and Mark Tixay, were personally responsible for delivering the cash.

These names, he points out, were previously mentioned during a Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearing chaired by Senator Marcoleta.

“It was me and my people… and my security who delivered [the money] to the house of President Bongbong Marcos and Speaker Martin Romualdez,” Zaldico alleged.

He then provided shocking specifics regarding the locations: “in North Forbes Park, South Forbes Park, and even to Malacañang.”

To back these extraordinary claims, Zaldico’s video included photographs allegedly documenting these deliveries, showing suitcases and bags. “The deliveries have records… Here are the pictures,” he stated, as the images flashed on screen. “I will release the photos of the deliveries together with this video to prove it.”

He explicitly stated that this evidence proves Orle Goteza was telling the truth about delivering money to Malacañang.

A Betrayal: The Whistleblower’s Motive
Why would Zaldico, the man who allegedly facilitated this entire operation, suddenly turn on his superiors? He provides a simple, powerful motive: betrayal.

“No money went to me,” Zaldico claims unequivocally. “All of the insertion went to our President and Speaker Martin Romualdez.”

He paints himself as the designated fall guy, the “front page” for the scandal, who was used to execute the plan and take the public blame while the primary beneficiaries allegedly walked away with billions. He claims he received nothing for his role. This act of public confession, therefore, is framed as an act of retribution.

“It’s only right that you expose this now,” the video’s narrator comments. “You did everything to steal the money, but you received nothing. They were the only ones who benefited. You are the one at fault… It’s only natural you would be angry.”

Zaldico’s testimony details how the 25 billion figure was reached. He claims he asked the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) what the standard “SOP” or kickback was for the Office of the President.

“The answer given to me was 25%,” Zaldico stated. “This means 25% of the 100 billion… in total, 25 billion went to President Bongbong Marcos.”

A Direct Challenge to the Ombudsman
Zaldico has now thrown down the gauntlet, directly challenging Ombudsman Samuel Remulla to investigate his claims. He did so by highlighting a potential conflict of interest that could paralyze any official probe.

“I challenge Ombudsman Remulla,” Zaldico declared. “If he is serious about his press release… that he will include Martin Romualdez if I provide evidence, he should prove his pronouncement now. He should investigate his fraternity brad.”

This explosive allegation—that Speaker Romualdez is a “fraternity brother” of the Ombudsman—is presented by Zaldico as the reason he believes the Speaker has remained untouched by investigations. He questions Remulla’s impartiality and dares him to investigate both Romualdez and President Bongbong Marcos.

Knowing that the Ombudsman may not act, Zaldico also made a direct appeal to the Senate. “I am also calling on the Senate to investigate the 100 billion insertion of the president.”

The Counter-Argument and the Danger
Skeptics, including commentators like Sheila Magno and anti-Clair Castro, have raised logical counter-arguments. They question the methodology, asking why a president would risk such a blatant operation through a bicameral insertion instead of hiding it within the National Expenditure Program (NEP), a much earlier and more complex stage of the budget process.

Furthermore, critics have challenged Zaldico to return to the Philippines and present his evidence before the Senate. “Prove your claims, Zaldico,” has been the resounding cry from those who doubt his story.

However, the video’s narrator and Zaldico’s supporters point out the grave danger this entails. Returning now, after directly accusing the entire administration, would be an incredible risk. Fears that Zaldico could be “silenced,” “neutralized,” or “meet with foul play” are rampant. By staying abroad, he remains free to release more information, but by returning, he places himself directly in the hands of the government he is accusing.

The nation is now left to grapple with a story that, if true, represents a betrayal of public trust on an unimaginable scale. The allegations are specific, the names have been named, and the alleged evidence has been presented. With the promise of a “Part 3,” this political firestorm is far from over.