The George Santos Circus

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70097
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by LordMortis »

Kurth wrote: Wed Jan 25, 2023 5:18 pm
Smoove_B wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 3:19 pm I'm waiting to see if a reputable news outlet picks it up, but I'm seeing reports online that someone released another name Santos used - his drag queen identity in Brazil. There are apparently photos. Given the GOP's hardline position on all things drag, if it's true he's definitely done for. Everything else is forgivable, but not being a former drag queen.
Even if the drag thing proves true (which I think is looking more and more likely), I'm not so sure Santos is done for. I don't think the GOP has lines. Like, any. At all. There's literally nothing that is truly disqualifying if it helps the GOP stay in power.
I'd be in your corner on this but Cawthorn seems to have been exception for his "deviancy" exposed in pictures. Of course, he still served his two years, even if it was a pariah. The big difference here is that McCarthy has so little room for error in his majority, given the "freedumb caucus"
User avatar
Alefroth
Posts: 8486
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Bellingham WA

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Alefroth »

I think they used his 'deviancy' as a convenient excuse because he was implicating party members.
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Unagi »

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70097
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by LordMortis »

He said: "It's completely illegal to sign somebody else's name on a federal filing without their consent. That is a big, big no-no."
I never would have guessed.
... alleged treasurers for Santos' campaigns get lawyers asap.
:lol:
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by malchior »

Unagi wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 10:42 am George Santos has been accused of listing a man as his campaign financier against his wishes and using his signature without consent.

Where one can read into 'accused of' and just replace it with 'caught red-handed'.
Wait. He thought he could forge someone's signature in a FEC filing while everyone is combing over his finances. He's not only a liar, he's a huge moron.

Edit: Didn't realize it was Newsweek which may have sensationalized the signature aspect. Other news reports indicate he was listed as the Treasurer on the documents. No note of a 'signature'. It's just a line on the form and the story is that Thomas Datwyler is just letting everyone know he declined the position.
User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 16433
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Zarathud »

The usual FEC form includes the name and signature of the treasurer who signs and certifies it has been reviewed and is correct, and faces liability if it is false, erroneous or incomplete.

Newsweek jumped to the conclusion any signature was fraudulent. But that’s a logical conclusion when the stated treasurer disavows it.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein
"I don't stand by anything." - Trump
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867
“It is the impractical things in this tumultuous hell-scape of a world that matter most. A book, a name, chicken soup. They help us remember that, even in our darkest hour, life is still to be savored.” - Poe, Altered Carbon
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by malchior »

Zarathud wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 1:23 pm The usual FEC form includes the name and signature of the treasurer who signs and certifies it has been reviewed and is correct, and faces liability if it is false, erroneous or incomplete.

Newsweek jumped to the conclusion any signature was fraudulent. But that’s a logical conclusion when the stated treasurer disavows it.
Ah thanks. Big help understanding where that jump came from.
User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 16433
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Zarathud »

Any investigation now has a cooperating witness that the campaign is committing fraud in reporting its finances. That’s really bad.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein
"I don't stand by anything." - Trump
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867
“It is the impractical things in this tumultuous hell-scape of a world that matter most. A book, a name, chicken soup. They help us remember that, even in our darkest hour, life is still to be savored.” - Poe, Altered Carbon
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Smoove_B »

We still aren't completely sure of what his name really is and he's sitting on two committees in the House. This has to be peak grift. He might not be as malicious or toxic as the last batch (MTG, Boebert, Gaetz, etc...) but this is worse on a whole different level. The idea that he's also engaged in campaign fraud? It's like he's trying get a grifting high score.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by malchior »

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 1:42 pmHe might not be as malicious or toxic as the last batch (MTG, Boebert, Gaetz, etc...) but this is worse on a whole different level. The idea that he's also engaged in campaign fraud? It's like he's trying get a grifting high score.
That title safely belongs to Trump who did it in the open and showed us all our system generally is unable to deal with folks like him. Santos is much like Trump. He has been lying, conning, and exaggerating all his life. His only mistake was not being born into wealth and festooned with criminal fixers like Roy Cohn and Michael Cohen who would have taught him how to be a cheating scumbag and get away with it.
Last edited by malchior on Thu Jan 26, 2023 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21196
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Grifman »

Heh:

Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by LawBeefaroni »

I heard a sound bite of McCarthy (I think) saying that Santos would be reviewed by the Ethics Committee to see if he had broken any laws. If that's the threshold for ethics violations, why even bother having the Committee?
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by malchior »

Mother Jones

tldr; - It seems inevitable that Santos is going to jail. Perhaps it is atrociously poor recordkeeping but it seems likely his campaigns might have been a money laundering machine. One thing is for sure - we are about to learn the current limits of the corruption and criming that is allowed in our nation.
In September 2020, George Santos’ congressional campaign reported that Victoria and Jonathan Regor had each contributed $2,800—the maximum amount—to his first bid for a House seat. Their listed address was 45 New Mexico Street in Jackson Township, New Jersey.

A search of various databases reveals no one in the United States named Victoria or Jonathan Regor. Moreover, there is nobody by any name living at 45 New Mexico Street in Jackson. That address doesn’t exist. There is a New Mexico Street in Jackson, but the numbers end in the 20s, according to Google Maps and a resident of the street.

Santos’ 2020 campaign finance reports also list a donor named Stephen Berger as a $2,500 donor and said he was a retiree who lived on Brandt Road in Brawley, California. But a spokesperson for William Brandt, a prominent rancher and Republican donor, tells Mother Jones that Brandt has lived at that address for at least 20 years and “neither he or his wife (the only other occupant [at the Brandt Road home]) have made any donations to George Santos. He does not know Stephen Berger nor has Stephen Berger ever lived at…Brandt Road.”
Liar says what? He is trying to say he has no idea how his campaign finances work. Sure buddy.
An additional maxed-out donor to Santos’ 2020 campaign tells Mother Jones that he did not make the $2,800 contribution attributed to him on Santos’ FEC filings. This person, who asked not to be identified, says that he had made a small contribution to Santos in early 2020. Santos, he notes, is a friend who supported him while he went through a divorce and battled cancer.

His small contribution via WinRed does appear in an FEC filing, and he says that this week he located a record of it on his debit card statement. He adds that he could find no record on his debit or credit card statements of the $2,800 attributed to him in both WinRed and Santos FEC filings. The initial small dollar donation that he made on WinRed accurately listed his employment information. The $2,800 WinRed contribution made months later listed a different place of work for him: an aborted hand sanitizer venture that only he and Santos had worked on together.

Last week, the friend contacted Santos about the $2,800 donation. Santos, he says, warned him about speaking to reporters and asserted that the media was pursuing clicks, not the truth. According to the friend, Santos told him over the phone that any donation he didn’t agree to would be reimbursed.

After the friend subsequently advised Santos to talk to Mother Jones for this story, Santos texted him, “I’m letting my legal team handle this stuff. I’ve never been involved in the financial aspect or the filing aspects of the campaign.”
User avatar
TheMix
Posts: 10902
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 5:19 pm
Location: Broomfield, Colorado

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by TheMix »

any donation he didn’t agree to would be reimbursed
What the heck does that mean? How would they get a donation that wasn't agreed to? Unless they had direct access to your bank... Or ran a charge through a credit card that wasn't authorized... That's insane. If the money came from another source and was just attributed, they wouldn't refund it. Right? Crazy. /smh

Black Lives Matter

Isgrimnur - Facebook makes you hate your friends and family. LinkedIn makes you hate you co-workers. NextDoor makes you hate your neighbors.
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19317
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Jaymann »

He never met a donation he didn't like.
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Isgrimnur »

TheMix wrote: Sat Jan 28, 2023 12:53 pm
any donation he didn’t agree to would be reimbursed
What the heck does that mean? How would they get a donation that wasn't agreed to? Unless they had direct access to your bank... Or ran a charge through a credit card that wasn't authorized... That's insane. If the money came from another source and was just attributed, they wouldn't refund it. Right? Crazy. /smh
Occam's razor? Bribery.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Carpet_pissr
Posts: 19978
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: Columbia, SC

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Carpet_pissr »

That sounds like ‘sorry we falsely used your name. We’ll pay you the amount that was listed even though you didn’t contribute that much’

Donor X contributed $50
Campaign claimed donor X contributed $2K
Campaign will now pay donor X $1950 (to keep them quiet?)
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by malchior »

I don't think so. It's the stock response you're supposed to give when there are unauthorized transactions (which do happen occasionally). He is trying to sound like he is on the up and up and following the law to correct honest mistakes. The difference is that he's now probably been caught red-handed falsifying campaign donations.
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Holman »

Everyone keeps pointing out that there is no mechanism for recalling a member of congress.

However, his colleagues can vote to expel him with a 2/3 vote. Democrats should be declaring their willingness to do so and tarring the GOP with its refusal to act. Beat this drum for as long as it takes.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by malchior »

This is one of the few times passivity might be a good move. The embarrassing stories are still flowing free and easy.
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Smoove_B »

There's zero shame and zero chance he's expelled. They sat him on two committees! He just needs to keep voting "Yes" on whatever garbage the GOP is proposing and he's on easy street. The idea that they're going to indict a sitting member of the House is hilarious to me, but that might be my terminal case of cynicism speaking.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Holman »

Smoove_B wrote: Sat Jan 28, 2023 4:36 pm There's zero shame and zero chance he's expelled. They sat him on two committees! He just needs to keep voting "Yes" on whatever garbage the GOP is proposing and he's on easy street. The idea that they're going to indict a sitting member of the House is hilarious to me, but that might be my terminal case of cynicism speaking.
Well, unlike presidents, congress members have a long and storied tradition of being indicted (and convicted) while in office. There have been at least a couple dozen in our lifetime.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
stessier
Posts: 29816
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 12:30 pm
Location: SC

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by stessier »

Congresspeople are actually incentivized to stay in office until they are charged. Mr Fed talked about other cases where they simply agree to resign and the charges get dropped. If they resign before then, they no longer have that to offer and things go much worse for them.
I require a reminder as to why raining arcane destruction is not an appropriate response to all of life's indignities. - Vaarsuvius
Global Steam Wishmaslist Tracking
Running____2014: 1300.55 miles____2015: 2036.13 miles____2016: 1012.75 miles____2017: 1105.82 miles____2018: 1318.91 miles__2019: 2000.00 miles
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by malchior »

3 GOP Congressmen were convicted or plead out in the Trump Presidency alone. I truly think Santos is going to get burned...and burned quickly.
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Smoove_B »

Image
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Isgrimnur »

malchior wrote: Sat Jan 28, 2023 5:52 pm 3 GOP Congressmen were convicted or plead out in the Trump Presidency alone.
All three of whom were subsequently pardoned before the changing of the guard.

And then there's Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE).
Within days of Fortenberry's conviction, lawmakers from both parties called on him to resign from Congress. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said on March 25 [2022], "I think he had his day in court... I think if he wants to appeal, he could go do that as a private citizen... But I think when someone's convicted, it's time to resign."
We'll see if that remains a hard line for him in the future, but Kevinceañera doesn't strike me as someone blessed with an overabundance of ethics and consistancy.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Defiant »



Of course, he might be lying.
User avatar
gilraen
Posts: 4312
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:45 pm
Location: Broomfield, CO

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by gilraen »

This is the final grift: draw a congressman's salary for doing absolutely nothing (must have gotten the idea from MTG).
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Unagi »

Can’t the GOP ‘recuse’ (kick) him from committees without his self recusal? I’ve never heard of that but I suppose it’s a thing.
I mean wasn’t he just given the 2 committee appointments?

“I promise not to take the committee position that you gave me.”
Is that about right ?

Keeps them from formally kicking him off the committee. ?
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Unagi wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:53 am Can’t the GOP ‘recuse’ (kick) him from committees without his self recusal? I’ve never heard of that but I suppose it’s a thing.
I mean wasn’t he just given the 2 committee appointments?

“I promise not to take the committee position that you gave me.”
Is that about right ?

Keeps them from formally kicking him off the committee. ?
Sounds like he's still taking the positions, just agreeing not to show up.


Maybe a Kim Foxx style recusal?
"Although we used the term 'recuse' as it relates to State's Attorney Foxx's involvement in this matter, it was a colloquial use of the term rather than in its legal sense," the office said in a statement.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by malchior »

It's unclear what this means. His position as typical is not far from gibberish.
User avatar
Alefroth
Posts: 8486
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Bellingham WA

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Alefroth »

It's probably to give the GOP a little cover in going after Omar.
User avatar
waitingtoconnect
Posts: 960
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 5:56 am

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by waitingtoconnect »

gilraen wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:52 am This is the final grift: draw a congressman's salary for doing absolutely nothing (must have gotten the idea from MTG).
Hey this is America. You can get a presidents salary for playing golf, using Twitter, watching Fox News and eating McDonald’s all day.
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Smoove_B »

He just can't stop:
According to Bloomberg News, Santos told potential donors while running for Congress in 2021 that he produced Broadway's ill-fated Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark. Yes, of all the Broadway shows to lie about having produced, Santos allegedly picked not Hamilton, not The Phantom of the Opera, not The Producers, not Bette Midler in Hello, Dolly!. He chose one of Broadway's most infamous productions, which reportedly lost a staggering $60 million of its investment even after a three-year drama-filled run.

Perhaps needless to say, Santos was not credited as a producer in the Spider-Man Playbill. And Bloomberg confirmed via an assistant of lead producer Michael Cohl that Santos did not, in fact, have anything to do with the show.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Smoove_B wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 7:29 pm He just can't stop:
According to Bloomberg News, Santos told potential donors while running for Congress in 2021 that he produced Broadway's ill-fated Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark. Yes, of all the Broadway shows to lie about having produced, Santos allegedly picked not Hamilton, not The Phantom of the Opera, not The Producers, not Bette Midler in Hello, Dolly!. He chose one of Broadway's most infamous productions, which reportedly lost a staggering $60 million of its investment even after a three-year drama-filled run.

Perhaps needless to say, Santos was not credited as a producer in the Spider-Man Playbill. And Bloomberg confirmed via an assistant of lead producer Michael Cohl that Santos did not, in fact, have anything to do with the show.
That was nearly 2 years ago. Are we going to live in the past or move on?
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
ImLawBoy
Forum Admin
Posts: 14950
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:49 pm
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by ImLawBoy »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Sat Feb 04, 2023 10:30 am
Smoove_B wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 7:29 pm He just can't stop:
According to Bloomberg News, Santos told potential donors while running for Congress in 2021 that he produced Broadway's ill-fated Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark. Yes, of all the Broadway shows to lie about having produced, Santos allegedly picked not Hamilton, not The Phantom of the Opera, not The Producers, not Bette Midler in Hello, Dolly!. He chose one of Broadway's most infamous productions, which reportedly lost a staggering $60 million of its investment even after a three-year drama-filled run.

Perhaps needless to say, Santos was not credited as a producer in the Spider-Man Playbill. And Bloomberg confirmed via an assistant of lead producer Michael Cohl that Santos did not, in fact, have anything to do with the show.
That was nearly 2 years ago. Are we going to live in the past or move on?
Seriously! I'm not so worried about that - I judge Santos on the critical and commercial success of his latest production, Maverick!
That's my purse! I don't know you!
User avatar
Carpet_pissr
Posts: 19978
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: Columbia, SC

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Carpet_pissr »

“of all the Broadway shows to lie about having produced, Santos allegedly picked not Hamilton, not The Phantom of the Opera, not The Producers, not Bette Midler in Hello, Dolly!. He chose one of Broadway's most infamous productions, which reportedly lost a staggering $60 million of its investment even after a three-year drama-filled run.”

That actually makes sense to me. Far easier to make a claim on a stinker that the real producer probably wants people to forget, rather than a blockbuster like Hamilton.

Bit harder to get away with claiming to be Lin Manuel Miranda, than…???
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13681
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Max Peck »

Carpet_pissr wrote: Mon Feb 06, 2023 12:29 pm Bit harder to get away with claiming to be Lin Manuel Miranda, than…???
David Garfinkle.
According to the New York Post, Bono began composing Spider-Man after Andrew Lloyd Webber joked, "I'd like to thank rock musicians for leaving me alone for 25 years – I've had the theater all to myself"; Bono and Taymor "decided to give Andrew a little competition".

In August 2002, Marvel announced that Tony Adams would produce a stage musical based on the Spider-Man comics. Adams approached Bono and the Edge to be involved with the project; in turn, they enlisted Taymor to direct. In October 2005, Adams suffered a stroke while the creative team was assembled to sign contracts; he died two days later. Patrick Healy in The New York Times described their situation:
Others might have abandoned the project, but the Spider-Man team decided to go on, with Mr. Adams's partner, David Garfinkle, as lead producer. An able entertainment lawyer, Mr. Garfinkle had little producing experience, and he ceded artistic decisions to Ms. Taymor, a perfectionist whose aesthetic included never repeating herself. Mr. Garfinkle did not take the tack that Disney had while working with Ms. Taymor on their hit musical, The Lion King: her genius flourishes best under supervision.
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Isgrimnur »

CNBC
Republican Rep. George Santos on Monday denied groping a former prospective staffer in his congressional office, calling the sexual harassment allegation “comical.”

Santos, the embattled freshman lawmaker from New York who is facing a litany of other scandals and investigations, said he “of course” denies the latest claim “100%,” CNN reported.

That denial came three days after Santos’ accuser, Derek Myers, said he had filed a report asking the U.S. Capitol Police and the House Committee on Ethics to investigate the alleged sexual harassment incident.

Myers also asked the ethics panel to probe Santos’ office for allegedly assigning him staff duties and promising him future employment while he was an unpaid volunteer, according to a letter Myers posted on Twitter.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21196
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: The George Santos Circus

Post by Grifman »

Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
Post Reply