- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
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 one of the founding members of the Beatles, he’ll be ok
He’s also an angel investor with the resurgence campaign of Glamour Shots
And the newest premier star of Jersey Boys, as Frankie.
With all that, he’ll barely have time to be Pope.
Let alone his adventures on Mars
George Santos of Barsoom
See ya bozo
Later, literal fucking Art Vandelay.
deleted by creator
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!
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.
The GOP wants blackmail and leverage options, and only when they have the power.
Santos’s lies were pretty clear, blatant, and he was grifting his own party. Useless as an asset, and detrimental to his own people.
He is from a safe very red district so the craziest person wins the primary and then basically gets in free after that.
It’s a blue district, though only D+2 (meaning it tends to be 2 points more towards Dems than the national average). It did vote for Bush in 2004, but is otherwise straight blue for President since 1992. Most recently went for Biden by +10 points.
Republicans have historically held that seat with very large majorities. Over 70% during Bush and Obama presidencies. Trump was enough to drag it down but then as soon as he was off the ballot it’s back to crazy land Republicans. I might be wrong but to me that says deep red.
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.
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.
While the child porn and other things is pretty bad, why include prostitution?
Because it’s illegal to solicit prostitution in most countries. The other common illegal content was scat. That was the point of the exposé, to highlight that they were allowing illegal users making illegal content on their platform to get away with warnings - I mean, how can you merely warn someone who is underage that they should stop posting underage content?!
Fair enough, though it does still seem a bit odd to list prostitution in particular. Whats the joke? If you fuck while recording it it aint prostitution.
Shame on you for not laundering the money through a book deal!
Exactly. It’s like Bernie Madoff. Bernie was doing the same thing as everyone else in 2008, but his clients were all rich folks. He went to jail. The hilarious thing is that Donald Trump was interviewed about Bernie and even Donnie had to admit that it was mostly victimless, because everyone Madoff had stolen from could afford the loses.
Bernie is an interesting case. As part of his guilty plea, he admitted that from around 1990 onward, basically every transaction in his company was fraudulent. The actual start was probably at the beginning of his company in the '70s.
What makes that interesting is that his clients weren’t just rich, but experienced. They knew how to smell out a con. He was able to keep his claims just plausible enough that they didn’t notice for decades.
A lot of Ponzi schemes will claim 300% or 5000% percent returns in a year. Experienced investors know that’s bullshit; maybe you can get lucky in one or two trades, but it’s never sustainable. The SP500 will tend to give you returns of 8% or so in the long run (with plenty of year to year variation), and it’s hard to beat that while accounting for transaction costs. Bernie was claiming 15-20%, which is good, but not crazy.
imho, they all knew it was a scam, but they all figured that they were the insiders and only the rubes were getting fleeced.
Bernie was doing the same thing as everyone else in 2008, but his clients were all rich folks.
CITATION NEEDED
Lots of companies were using legal but sketchy as hell financial instruments and over inflating safety on investments where lots of people lost lots of money. Bernie was different. He was creating fraudulent statements saying you had money in your account with him for years and only paying out with what other new investors put in; classic Ponzi scheme.
What other large Ponzi schemes at the time are you saying were occurring?
What other large Ponzi schemes at the time are you saying were occurring?
You’re kidding, right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007–2008_financial_crisis
Of course, these weren’t schemes or a rip off because it was ‘legal.’
Yes. That’s a fundamentally different situation than a ponzi scheme
Of course, these weren’t schemes or a rip off because it was ‘legal.’
Now you’ve got it. One was unethical but legal (most of the housing crisis), Madoff was breaking established written law. Only Madoff was the Ponzi scheme.
You should learn to recognize sarcasm.
I could have done that and called into question your naive understanding of financial transactions. However, I wanted to keep from insulting you, but it looks like you’ve removed that opportunity.
You funny.
deleted by creator
Took long enough…
Yeet.
wow that only took half a year. good thing he still got to sit there and vote and get paid in the meantime
Longer than that. His antics were public knowledge about a minute after he took the oath.
His antics were public knowledge weeks before he took office. It was just impossible trying to get someone to actually give a damn at the time.
There was a phrase back in Jim Crow days; a ‘yellow dog’ Democrat was a Party stalwart who’d vote for a yellow dog if they had a ‘D’ next to their name. The Party has changed but the dogs haven’t
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. 🙄
“It stinks of politics”
- A politician about a political event.
The call was coming from inside the House!
Do you guys think he is going to get a job with a lobbyist group before or after he serves time in federal prison?
Former Congresscritters are only useful to lobbyists because they still have influence in Congress. Who the fuck listens to former Representative George Santos?
I don’t think so. I think he’s too toxic for even the worst of the GOP, especially since he’s admitted to being a serial liar. He has no credibility even within the party for him to be considered valuable to lobbyists.
So you’re saying he’ll be Trump’s VP pick?
Well, this is George Santos we’re talking about here. I mean, the man just received the votes of over 300 of his colleagues to leave Congress and become Trump’s VP pick. It has already led to Trump skyrocketing in the polls by 1462% among the fictional henchmen of the Marvel, DC, and Looney Tunes universes, and 3789% among incels who live in their mom’s basement and can’t even dress themselves.
deleted by creator
Guess they didn’t miss
Bye felipe
Bye Felicia
So what’s the count at the moment?
