I would have loved to see him kicked out, but completely understand the rationale Raskin gives for voting No.
I mean, given all my druthers I’d have Santos, Trump, and a dozen more of the most egregious scammers and liars marched down 5th Avenue in a recreation of Cersi Lannister’s walk. Naked, shaved head, people throwing spoiled food, mud, and excrement while chanting “SHAME! SHAME! SHAME!”
Yes. The only thing I would add is that a Representative has been chosen by the people of the district. It’s a serious matter to deprive the people of their chosen Representative, except in the clearest of cases.
Oh what a lovely vision. I shall use that as inspiration for my daydreams later.
Meanwhile, Santos is over on Twitter shouting that if you come for him, you better not miss.
CHUTZPAH! That he’s full of.
Haha! With all his committee assignments and allies in the House, he can certainly make life difficult for the other members of the House! I think he’s on 25 committees and leads 12 of them, according to him.
Your autocorrect misspelled “BULLSHIT”
ETA: In fairness, the classic definition of “chutzpah” is appropriate, since it means a barefaced insolence and presumptuous arrogance, and is intended as a pejorative. But I still think “bullshit” is more accurate.
Jeff Jackson voted against expulsion. Here is his explanation:
No, we need tumbrels.
he said the other day he’ll still be re-elected
If he actually believes in the principles of the Republican Party, yes. His presence make his party look bad.
But what if he doesn’t care about that? Then I guess he should do whatever seems best for him and his husband.
I notice “What’s best for his constituents” and “What’s best for the USA” are conspicuously absent from that list.
Of course you (or any of us) including that on our list would not magically teleport it into his list of priorities for how he decides. And his list is the one that’ll determine what he does.
He represents the fourth wealthiest district in the U.S. I’m sure there are people hurting there, as everywhere, but doubt having a better representative in D.C. will solve any pressing problems in Oyster Bay.
As for what is best for the U.S., I think it would be better if he mostly voted with the Democrats. But this applies just as much to all the other House Republicans.
His chances of re-election are low. He probably is going to be sentenced to prison. But there is a reasonable process for all this.
I think he has a responsibility to avoid criminal behavior going forward. That’s about it.
I took a quick google to find backup for that.
What I found was a few cites that his district has the 4th highest median income. Which is a very different idea than 4th wealthiest. Of course all the headlines on those articles talked about “wealth”, not income. And all mistook median income for total income or average income. In our highly skewly distributed world, median is not a real useful measure. Neither is average.
That’s not your fault and I’m not criticizing you. Just pointing out the gross limitations of the data I was able to find. If you found better I’m all ears / eyes.
But overall, yeah, the north shore of Long Island has a day job and is doin’ alright. But also is very interested, as all big money folks are, in having Congress do their bidding effectively. Lacking representation will not make them happy.
Maybe they shoulda paid a bit more attention when voting.
I guess that’s the best possible evidence he won’t.
He doesn’t care about any of that. He is an opportunist who saw the attention given to the likes of Cawthorne, Boebert, Gaetz, Greene, etc. and figured it was time for grifters to shine in the public arena. Shame and decency are outdated concepts to be exploited.
The loathsome policies are just noise to distract the rubes while their wallets are being lifted.
Santos looks at his peers like Cawthorne, Boebert, Gaetz, and Greene (and the big guy) and says “Why are you doing this to me? I thought I was one of you.”
And they say “You are one of us. And we’re all self-serving bastards.”
It’s a variation on the old saw of looking around the poker table to find the patsy.
Right now Santos is the designated patsy. Mostly self-designated, but designated nevertheless. Once he’s gone, someone else will be voted off the island as they all scramble up the greasy pole of media attention and concomitant grifting opportunities.
It’s about like a Battle Royale bout in professional wrestling. You win by throwing the others over the top rope to the floor below.
As someone else mentioned, he should really think about his constituents who put him there. He’ll never get any committee assignment, never get any bills sponsored, nothing. He’s a waste of a representative.
Ah, but what happens is that like some of the ones mentioned in recent posts here, that is not what he was “really” running for. They view a “political career” as just a highly visible paid influencer gig, where all that is asked back of them is a “yes” vote to pass the general agenda (and tbf he has been a bit better at that last part than most of that group).
Bibles have always disappointed me in this regard. Remember that other scene in front of a church close to the White House? If it didn’t happen then, it will never happen. Unfortunately, as there would be much rejoicing.
He could cheat everyone on 5th Avenue and still get their votes. He’s done it before.
A recent article about an interview with the subject of the thread:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/05/politics/george-santos-interview-2024/index.html
Pressed on the allegations, Santos said, “Were there mistakes made on those forms? Now I know they were. Were they malicious? No. Did I understand the reporting date? So, this is from last year to current date this year? No, I didn’t understand how that worked, and I’m a new candidate and I’m sorry that mistakes were made.
The last line nearly had me blow a vein. “Mistakes were made” - that’s right up there with all time greats like “thoughts and prayers” as a way to say something is wrong, but that the responder has zero responsibility or ownership of them. No further comments as it’s not a pit thread, but damn this being (I can’t call it a person, because there are too many verified and admitted lies about what sort of person it is) pisses me off.
Of note is that this time, they’re admitting a plea deal is possible although they’re not pursuing one:
In the interview, Santos also did not rule out a potential plea deal.
“I’m not saying I’m not ruling out – as of right now, it’s not on the table,” he said. “I’m not exploring any of that right now. Those conversations are yet to be had … right now I’m pretty focused on my defense.”
Personally, I read that as he’s probably offered to plead guilty, but wanted the results to stop at a stern scolding, rather than any actual consequences. Since he was probably laughed out of the room, now he’s concentrating on defense.
