Tingog Party-list Rep. Jude Acidre says that Navotas City lone district Rep. Toby Tiangco "walks and talks" like a supporter of Vice President Sara Duterte's, even if he denies it.

This, as Acidre dismissed Tiangco's allegation that House members were enticed with government aid and project allocations to support the ongoing impeachment case against Vice President Duterte.

“No one was coerced. No one was bribed. No one was promised anything in exchange for signing. Rep. Toby Tiangco should stop misleading the public, Acidre said.

He reckoned that serious allegations require serious proof, "not hearsay, not secondhand claims, and certainly not tsismis (gossip) dressed up as fact".

“Rep. Tiangco denies that he is aligned with Vice President Sara Duterte. That is his claim,” Acidre said. “But when the talking points, the timing, and the narrative all mirror the same lines being pushed to discredit the impeachment process and shield those under scrutiny, people will naturally ask questions.”

“At some point, perception follows pattern. If it walks like it, and talks like it, people will draw their own conclusions,” he added. “Baka siya ang takot sa sariling niyang multo (Maybe he fears his own ghost)."

Tiangco earlier said, "To be clear, I am not an ally of the Vice President. But unlike them, I am not scared of a Sara Duterte presidency because I can be accountable to any President."

"Hindi ko kailangang sumipsip sa kahit sinong Presidente (I don’t need to suck up to any President). I can work with any President I agree with and oppose a President I don't agree with," he said.

Acidre also rejected Tiangco’s claim that alleged wrongdoing had already been established through the Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI). The ICI was the body created by Malacañang to get to the bottom of the flood control projects corruption scandal.

“The ICI referral itself, signed by retired Supreme Court (SC) Justice Andres Reyes, explicitly states: ‘This referral is issued without any finding or conclusion of guilt or liability on the part of Former Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez,’” Acidre said.

“That is the Commission’s own language. So let us be precise: There is no finding of guilt. There is no conclusion of liability. There is no proof established by the ICI. What exists is a referral for further investigation—nothing more, nothing less,” he added.

Acidre challenged Tiangco to substantiate his claims linking lawmakers’ signatures to programs such as Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situation (AICS), Ayuda para sa Kapos ang Kita Program (AKAP), Tulong Panghanapbuhay sa Ating Disadvantaged/Displaced Workers (TUPAD) and infrastructure allocations.

“If he is claiming that Members of the House signed an impeachment complaint in exchange for AICS, AKAP, TUPAD, or infrastructure allocations, then he should do the responsible thing: Name names. Present evidence. Submit it under oath,” he said.

“Anything less is pure speculation—and worse, disinformation that undermines the integrity of the House,” he added.

The Tingog lawmaker said he personally witnessed the discussions and signing of the first impeachment complaint, which he said disputed Tiangco’s assertions.

“Let me be absolutely clear. I was present during the discussions and the signing of the first impeachment complaint. Rep. Tiangco was not,” Acidre said.

“He was nowhere to be found during those critical moments. He did not witness the deliberations. He did not hear the testimonies. He did not review the evidence as it unfolded,” Acidre noted.

“So whoever told him that there were ‘considerations’ in exchange for signatures either misled him—or he is now choosing to repeat a lie. Either way, that claim is false...Members made their decision based on evidence—documents, testimonies, and financial records that raised serious and legitimate questions.”

Acidre also warned that linking “For Later Release” (FLR) projects to political leverage--something that Tiangco insinuated--without evidence only fuels public distrust.

“As for the suggestion that projects marked '[FLR]’ can be used as leverage for votes, this is exactly the kind of baseless speculation that erodes public trust. We should not normalize the idea that legislative decisions are transactional without evidence," he said.