How was George Santos' resume not an election issue?

This reporting from Mother Jones was very interesting. Apparently lots of big money donors to his failed 2020 election run don’t seem to exist. Quelle surprise.

During Santos’ first run for Congress, only about 45 people maxed out to his campaign during the primary and general elections. In nine instances, Mother Jones found no way to contact the donor because no person by that name now lives at the address listed on the reports the Santos campaign filed with the FEC. None had ever contributed to a candidate before sending Santos the maximum amount allowed, according to FEC records. Nor have any of these donors contributed since. The Santos campaign’s filings list the profession of each of these donors as “retired.”

On Wednesday afternoon, more than a half-dozen campaign committees affiliated with George Santos filed paperwork with the Federal Elections Commission stating that Thomas Datwyler, a campaign finance consultant, had taken over as the committees’ treasurer.

There was only one problem: Datwyler had not agreed to serve as treasurer. In fact, he had told the Santos campaign on Monday that he did not want the job.

Perplexing how documents were filed and electronically signed by someone purporting to be Datwyler…

At least Garland isn’t trying to fob the whole thing off on yet another special counsel. So far.

I hope you’re not suggesting something…nefarious. /s

Wait Wait did a hilarious segment on the lies by Santos uncovered this week. You can read the transcript here:

Here’s a small snippet:

SAGAL: True or false? Writing on Wikipedia, Santos said he had appeared on an episode of “Hannah Montana.”
BABYLON: False.
SAGAL: No, it’s true. He said that. (LAUGHTER)
SAGAL: Negin, true or false? In that same post, Santos spelled “Hannah Montana” correctly.
FARSAD: True.
SAGAL: No, false. He did not spell it correctly.

Looks like Santos is voluntarily giving up his committee assignments because he is “a distraction”. Yeah, right. There’s something going on. Can’t wait to find out what.

Trump/Santos 2024?

At the very least he has figured he’d better lie low and Not Be Seen…

I think Santos/Greene (or probably Greene/Santos) is more likely. Not that they’d get anywhere with it, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they announced it.

(was waiting to see if there was a hidden link to the Monty Python sketch, then realized that’s a bit too pointed for the forum)

But yes, I think they’ve moved past the “ignore it and it’ll blow over” and into “damage control mode.”

When this plan was explained to Santos, he said “Okay, I’m normally really good at these but I never knew you could aim them in specific directions.”

The R’s were taking flak for trying to kick experienced Democrats off committees while putting a newly elected lying sack of shit onto committees. So Santos was told to go away, because the hypocrisy was just to freakin’ obvious.

And Committee work is work. (not bad work, but you have to read some, and show up)

Santos would probably not mind skipping that part of his “job.”

Dumb and dumber? No, Liar and Liarer.

Santos is “lie-est”.

So far.

Jesus. You just scared the shit out of me.

Is there a source for this information that quotes any human OTHER than Santos? It makes sense (same pay, less work), but I don’t know why they can’t find a more reliable source.

The WaPo article that @MulderMuffin linked to quotes other House Republicans who seem to be confirming it.

I saw that, but they seemed to be basing their reaction on Santos’s statement. Has House leadership weighed in?

Here’s an interview with the man he swindled.