George Santos charged with defrauding campaign donors

Is there a way for a congress person to be recalled?

There is not a way to recall him. My understanding is the only way is to remove him is based on a 2/3 vote from the house which would be presumably based on ethics violations and or criminal charges.
 
He made believe he was someone that he is not. He did not allow his voters to know who he actually was on Election Day. That's grounds for expulsion.

He's not George Santos? I mean, at that point maybe you have something.

That he lied about everything about himself isn't that. Even if he defrauded his donors that's a criminal issue. Unseating a member of Congress is deeply anti-democratic, and doing so based on appraisal of conduct prior to being in congress is a terrible idea for a whole slew of reasons.

The whole "did not allow the voters to know who he was" doesn't really play when the local paper is telling people who he was.
 
Re: Santos claiming radiation therapy lowered his immunity....
Isn't immunodeficiency from radiation temporary?
It may not even have applied in his case.

I went through radiation therapy (neck cancer) in the middle of The covid pandemic. I asked the doctor about vaccination, immunity, etc. and was told it was not a problem.

Unless I understood wrong... Whether it affects your immunity probably depends on where the radiation was directed. The head doesn't play a big role in producing white blood cells so getting treatment for brain cancer wouldn't have affected his immunity at all.

Sent from my moto e using Tapatalk
 
....
The whole "did not allow the voters to know who he was" doesn't really play when the local paper is telling people who he was.

What's the circulation of "the local paper?" It's certainly not comparable to the NY Times or Post or Newsday. Other outlets didn't pick up the story. The fact that local Republican leaders have called for his resignation is a pretty clear indicator that most voters didn't actually vote for what they actually got.

ETA: The North Shore Leader is a weekly paper with a circulation of 20,000. Not many people would have seen their stories.

A PBS interview with the paper's publisher.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/s...eorge-santos-scandal-before-november-election
 
Last edited:
I think, in Private, the Dems don't want Santos to quit. He is doing more damage to the GOP House's image then they could hope to do in a hundred years.
 
I think, in Private, the Dems don't want Santos to quit. He is doing more damage to the GOP House's image then they could hope to do in a hundred years.

The fact that anyone can still make that argument with a straight face after Trump, Boebart, Gantz, etc, etc, etc and a bolt of lightning doesn't hit them is all the proof you need there is no God.
 
What's the circulation of "the local paper?" It's certainly not comparable to the NY Times or Post or Newsday.

The information was 100% out there.

If the apathy of the voting process bothers you look at the system. Unseating an elected legislator isn't fixing that and the cure would be way worse than the disease. There are massive problems here and that lying goofball scammer being in congress is the least of them.

They elected a cipher and those that claim to be hoodwinked should hang their heads in shame instead. It wasn't like this guy is even that good at lying.

Other outlets didn't pick up the story. The fact that local Republican leaders have called for his resignation is a pretty clear indicator that most voters didn't actually vote for what they actually got.

It's at best buyers remorse. At this point now that he and they are a national punchline of course people are going to play the victim. However, we live in a world where Hershel Walker almost won a senate seat with a comparable track record so lets not be gullible and assume this goes any differently if Santos' life story was directly beamed into the brains of these voters.

The local GOP officials have no business playing the victim. If they were capable of shame they should resign. It is a toss up whether it is worse that they knew or that they didn't know.

The whole thing has "let's prevent fascism by having it arrested" vibe. Or "prevent socialism in social media by nationalizing facebook."

Protecting democracy by tossing out the results of an election because people were fooled by a mediocre at best conman is right up there. It's facially absurd.
 
He's not George Santos? I mean, at that point maybe you have something.

That he lied about everything about himself isn't that. Even if he defrauded his donors that's a criminal issue. Unseating a member of Congress is deeply anti-democratic, and doing so based on appraisal of conduct prior to being in congress is a terrible idea for a whole slew of reasons.

The whole "did not allow the voters to know who he was" doesn't really play when the local paper is telling people who he was.

I disagree. He lied about who he was to the voters. To the voters, he was Jewish. To the voters he had relatives that died in the Holocaust. To the voters his mother died on 911.

To the voters he graduated with a degree in economics and finance from Baruch College.

To voters he attended New York University. Or was it Columbia? Doesn't matter. He didn't attend either.

To the voters he went Horace Mann School a prestigious private academy. He didn't

His campaign bio states he worked at Goldman Sachs and Citigroup. Didn't work at either.

His campaign bio says he is married to a gay man. Is he? There is no marriage record.

He said his mother's life was taken by the attacks on 911. He said she was in the South Tower that day. She wasn't. She was in Brazil. She died 14 years later.

This is just a few of the untruths.

And you're saying the only legitimate reason to expel him from Congress is if he lied about his label?

Seriously?
 
.....
Protecting democracy by tossing out the results of an election because people were fooled by a mediocre at best conman is right up there. It's facially absurd.

He won by extensive fraud, pure and simple, and we don't usually reward fraud.
 
He won by extensive fraud, pure and simple, and we don't usually reward fraud.

Problem is the knd of fraud he used is not a criminal offense..except for the campaing fund lies. Padding your resume, however reprehesnible, is not illegal.
 
Problem is the knd of fraud he used is not a criminal offense..except for the campaing fund lies. Padding your resume, however reprehesnible, is not illegal.

But if someone gets any other job by lying about their qualifications on their resume and their employer subsequently discovers it they are promptly fired. Why should this job be treated differently?
 
Problem is the knd of fraud he used is not a criminal offense..except for the campaing fund lies. Padding your resume, however reprehesnible, is not illegal.

But if someone gets any other job by lying about their qualifications on their resume and their employer subsequently discovers it they are promptly fired. Why should this job be treated differently?

Exactly!! :thumbsup:

What do you think your new employer Bank of America would do if you stated on your resume you graduated with a degree in economics and finance from a prestigious university and had been employed by Goldman Sachs and Citigroup only to find out you were a high school dropout with a GED?
 
But if someone gets any other job by lying about their qualifications on their resume and their employer subsequently discovers it they are promptly fired. Why should this job be treated differently?

Because it is an elected office. And except in severe circumstances, the will of the voters, however stupid, should be respected.
 
Because it is an elected office. And except in severe circumstances, the will of the voters, however stupid, should be respected.

Your argument is basically caveat emptor. You're not protecting democracy, you're protecting fraud.
 
Because it is an elected office. And except in severe circumstances, the will of the voters, however stupid, should be respected.

These are severe circumstances. The will of the voters was not reflected in the result.
 
Problem is the knd of fraud he used is not a criminal offense..except for the campaing fund lies. Padding your resume, however reprehesnible, is not illegal.

It doesn't have to be illegal to be a firing offense.
 
It doesn't have to be illegal to be a firing offense.

I agree, and I think he should resign, but I am just reluctant to overule the voters except in out and out criminal or other extreme cases. So far, I don't see that here.
That might change if more evidence about his misuse of campaing funds comes out.
And forgive if I think this was a democract alot of people here would be a lot more forgiving.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom