Octopus Overlords

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.

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."

... alleged treasurers for Santos' campaigns get lawyers asap.

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'.

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.

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.

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.”

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.”

any donation he didn’t agree to would be reimbursed

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

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.

malchior wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 5:52 pm 3 GOP Congressmen were convicted or plead out in the Trump Presidency alone.

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."

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. ?

"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.

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).

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.

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.

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?

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 12:29 pm Bit harder to get away with claiming to be Lin Manuel Miranda, than…???

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.

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.