And honestly, the fact that he thought that lying and saying he has more education than he really does at least means he understands that education is valuable, which actually puts him ahead of a lot of other Republicans.
Except that Long Island still has Newsday, one of the largest circulation daily newspapers remaining in the U.S. and anchored firmly in the third Congressional District. They ran dozens of stories about the campaign but apparently didn’t look very deeply at either candidate.
But I wonder if one of the few areas of political agreement between Archie, and his son in law AKA the meathead, would have been that comng from Goldman Sachs isn’t a great look for a political candidate trying to win in Queens.
I bet his chronic dishonesty played a big factor in the divorce.
This also can’t be going over well with the LGBTQ+ community, there and elsewhere.
Is “George Santos” even his real name?
One small local newspaper did catch on to him in a general way before the election, and endorsed the Democratic opponent (despite the newspaper’s conservative bent). They called him “sketchy.”
(Some Democrats may have not wanted to push too far against a gay man and an immigrant — that might have been one factor in their dropping this ball).
The money behind this fraudster stinks to high heaven. Tulsi Gabbard was filling in for Tucker Carlson and boy howdy, did she read him the riot act. I don’t like her at all, at all and I’m surprised she did this.
I can’t tell if this is a joke or something, because everything about this guy is so surreal, but there are rumors or something that his marriage was a sham to help her get citizenship. Makes sense if he’s actually gay, but who knows if he is.
Unless they had rock solid receipts, calling him out was likely to just make him a martyr. Look at the original statement from his lawyer—all they had to do was play it like that and if anything it probably would have helped him. The only reason he had to respond seriously at all is that the NYT had the goods on him.
The problem is that few outlets short of the NYT have the investigative oomph to get the goods on him like that, so the best they can do is “sketchy”.
Who but the NYT would have ever called his former employer? Astounding journalism right there.
Getting interviewed by both Tulsi AND Weiner? Really an all-star lineup.
Apparently Santos is not the only one who made up some stuff on his resume.
Note: in Santos’ case “some stuff” = “every single item”
Wow. I just caught highlights of that interview on Twitter and I was surprised at how hard she went at him – kept saying outright “lies”!
Is this sarcasm? Everything that the NYT was able to get on him was obtained by making some phone calls and reviewing publicly-available filings.
Yeah, Biden’s a bigger liar I wonder if he thought throwing the hated Biden out there would soften her attack? Maybe he should have tried Hunter.
He’s even shitty at his Tu Quoque attempt.
Well sure I’m a liar, but those other guys are BIGGER liars, because they are!
So is his actual last name Santos, or Devolder-Santos? If he won the election but did not use his legal last name, can they kick him out for that?
And did he actually work at the scammy investment company, or did he lie about working there?
It’s lies all the way down!
Marjorie Traitor Goone thinks he should be forgiven because now he’s telling the truth.
Doesn’t surprise me. Most partisan pundits jump at the chance to appear non-partisan by raking an irredeemable member of their own party over the coals. Reminds me a tiny bit about how giddy Rachel Maddow was about her interview with Rod Blagojevich after his scandal.
His name apparently is non-hyphenated, George Anthony Devolder Santos, following the Brazilian style of having the Father’s family name last and the Mother’s family name before (the reverse of the Spanish-American style). His mother was Devolder, his father Santos.
So in the American style his name IS George “Santos”, the more culturally appropriate form would be George “Devolder Santos” and legally either should work.
In a follow up NYT article a few days ago it was even mentioned that yes, the Democratic side did seem to have some of that information, but it had just sat there. That apparently nobody was able to get attention to it when it could have made a difference.
As mentioned by others in the thread, probably there was a Failure Of Nerve by wanting to do a “high road” issues-centered campaign, and believing (not unreasonably) that if all this came out in the homestretch the R voters would have not wanted to hear it, seen it as lib media smearing, and circled the wagons anyway.