Let it be know that if you take office while actively committing fraud, embezzlement, and lying through your teeth about nearly every single detail of your life and accomplishments, the rest of Congress will ONLY let that slide for 11 months! You've been warned!
this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2023
787 points (98.6% liked)
politics
19144 readers
2620 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(Unless you’re elected President, in which case, bully for you!)
Let's be honest. None of those reasons mattered to his party. He got ousted because he cross dressed.
Proof: Trump
Plus a month or more before taking the “oath” of office.
You mean:
... will ONLY pay you $159,500 with tax dollars. You've been warned!
Mike Johnson said "I personally have real reservations about doing this [expulsion], I’m concerned about a precedent that may be set for that." Yes, let's NOT set a precedent of holding politicians accountable for lies, fraud, and theft!
It should be pretty easy to find the list of everyone else who voted not to expel, so we know who is pro-corruption.
I mean, yeah...They're all criminals. Would be pretty stupid of them to want this to be normal. Because of all the crime, ya know?
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
including stealing money from his campaign, deceiving donors about how contributions would be used
I bet this was the real reason he was expelled. Congressmen rely on donations for their grift, and their donors were no doubt asking if they supported his practice.
Hell, he literally stole money from another Republican Congressman and his wife.
You almost have to respect it.
For how blatant his lies and fabrications were, and how brazenly he stole and misued money, I'm honestly impressed that he got into office in the first place (who tf was running his opponent's campaign?). Surviving 11 months after that was just standard "Republicans refusing to hold each other accountable" behavior. But man, gotta admit the guy pulled off a pretty decent con.
I’m honestly impressed that he got into office in the first place (who tf was running his opponent’s campaign?).
His opponent repeatedly tried to blow the whistle at what was going on with Santos' campaign, but was all but ignored by the media who considered it a low-level race not worth covering. I think it took about a month after the election before the media started to actually give a damn.
load more comments
(4 replies)
I don't even think that deceiving donors was the line. I think it was exactly what he bought. OnlyFans? Scandalous. Botox for a man? Shameful. If he'd bought guns and an F350, or just Venmo'd a high school student, he'd still a congressman.
Friendly reminder that OnlyFans talking about banning porn on their platform was just a cover to distract from the news story about them allowing users hosting child porn, prostitution and other illegal material to get away with warnings, so long as their accounts were profitable.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(11 replies)
Pffft, big whoop, he’ll go back to being CEO of Goldman-Sachs and owner of the Denver Broncos, this is barely a speedbump.
He's also an angel investor with the resurgence campaign of Glamour Shots
load more comments
(1 replies)
He's one of the founding members of the Beatles, he'll be ok
Jesus fucking Christ finally
**Took them long enough. But the bad thing about this is that it was at all.necessary. A criminal should not join the house, and if found out should immediately resign on his own. But he stuck to the seat and it took ages to get rid of him.
load more comments
(20 replies)
311 to 114
The house has a Republican majority, you really have to fuck up for them to break the 11th commandment.
Funny story about Reagan and the '11th Commandment.'
Back in the day, a group of Dem women approached their GOP counterparts with a story about Nestle's Africa operations. Basically, Nestle was tricking poor women by giving away free formula to new mothers. The supply lasted until the mothers stopped lactating, then they had to pay full price. This meant that the babies were not getting enough food at the time they needed good nutrition the most.
The GOP women wanted the Party to stand up to Nestle, but Reagan talked thme down, and explained that conservatives shouldn't shaft one another.
Later on, Reagan attacked President Ford for sticking by the treaty that returned the Panama Canal. There was no way Ford could renege on the treaty, but it made Reagan look like a tough guy.
Ronnie was a hypocritical bastard?! Noooooooooooooo
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Nehls claimed, without evidence, that the Ethics Committee had been “weaponized” against Santos.
“You may accept this report as grounds for expulsion from Congress, but I say no,” Nehls said. “It’s not right. The totality of circumstance appears biased. It stinks of politics.”
Any amount of ethics will always be resisted by Republicans. 🙄
In the entire history of the US, there have only been five ever expelled from the US House of Representatives. Three of those five that were expelled because of that whole Civil War thing.
Today, we've added a sixth name to that list. George Santos.
And don't forget the guy has in front of him a very long list of Federal indictments that include hits like conspiracy against the United States, wire fraud, credit card fraud, and money laundering all of those being really big no-nos. Dude has absolutely not been having the greatest last eleven months of his life and boy oh boy we're JUST getting started on the downhill for him.
Like it's a surprisingly very LONG list of crimes he's facing, like WTF dude did you just spend the last eleven months going, "Okay I've had my morning coffee, time to crime!" And then investigators found more crime after he was indicted and was like "Oh no we've got to put all that other crime on pause because … I mean JUST LOOK AT THIS SHIT!!" and filed a superseding indictment. Like shit was so bad, US Prosecutors were like "all his previous crimes, we've got to put that shit on pause. This new shit, it's GOT to take priority." There's no way you violate that much of the law just by happy chance.
I don't know where we'll all be at in five years from now, but I DO know that each day from now onward, for George Santos it can only get worse for him. Like today, today is the worse day in George Santos' life. And tomorrow, tomorrow will be the worse day in George Santos' life. And that pattern will continue for a good amount of time going forward.
Turns out, the whole "can't arrest me for criming as long I commit new crimes for you to investigate" only works for a certain fat, orange, drowned-muskrat-wearing Floridiot.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
“It almost would have been a dereliction of my duty if I did not support this,” Guest said Friday. “I did what I felt was right from a personal point of view.”
It absolutely would have been yet another dereliction of your duty.
load more comments
(1 replies)
311 to 114... And they only needed 290 to bounce him. +21 more than necessary!
Apparently we CAN work together!
Who are the two Democrats who voted present instead of yes? And why did they do that??
Scott (VA) and Williams (GA) voted Nay
Green (TX) and Jackson (IL) voted present. Couldn't give you a reason though
Jackson Lee (TX) and Phillips (MN) were not voting for some reason as well as AOC who I suspect didn't vote since she's also a NY member
load more comments
(4 replies)
Buh bye. Buh bye, now.
Buh bye.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The House on Friday voted to expel Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.) from Congress — an action the chamber had taken only five times in U.S. history and not for more than 20 years — in response to an array of alleged crimes and ethical lapses that came to light after the freshman lawmaker was found to have fabricated key parts of his biography.
The vote followed the release two weeks ago of a 56-page Ethics Committee report that accused Santos of an array of misconduct — including stealing money from his campaign, deceiving donors about how contributions would be used, creating fictitious loans and engaging in fraudulent business dealings.
Santos, the report alleges, spent hefty sums on personal enrichment, including visits to spas and casinos, shopping trips to high-end stores and payments to a subscription site that contains adult content.
A defiant Santos has long denied wrongdoing and resisted calls to resign, claiming at a news conference Thursday that fellow House members were “bullying” him and that the Ethics Committee report was incomplete and “littered with hyperbole.”
During House debate Thursday over the resolution, Guest defended the work and report of the panel, saying investigators spent eight months reviewing 172,000 pages of documents and interviewing 40 witnesses.
During long-winded remarks on X Spaces last week, Santos — despite saying he would not step down from office — said he no longer wanted to work with “a bunch of hypocrites” in Congress, whom he accused of committing infractions more severe than his, including being “more worried about getting drunk every night” with lobbyists.
The original article contains 1,411 words, the summary contains 262 words. Saved 81%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Yeet.
view more: next ›