The House Ethics Committee announced on Thursday that the panel has ramped up its investigation into embattled Rep. George Santos (R-NY), issuing more than 30 subpoenas and expanding the scope of its inquiry after the Justice Department charged him with 13 criminal counts last month.
Expanding to delay. It’s fine if they want to investigate after saying he should be expelled but getting to the point of saying he should be expelled should of been a day’s long effort. Now it’s allowing him to stay in until close to the election where they can come out agaisnt him and act like they aren’t the party of Santos.
Yep. Flailing to delay, obscure, or pre-empt. Ain’t gonna work: Kevin is too weak and stupid.
whether Santos “engaged in unlawful activity” during his 2022 election campaign
Slow down, y’all… This is a representative of the United States we’re talking about… If it was wrong, he wouldn’t have done it… The Republican Congress will hold his feet to the fire… The early bird catches the worm…
Malarkey
The Ethics Committee is equally split between Dems and Repubs. If they’re “expanding to delay,” the Dems are in on it. I suspect that at least 6 of the members take this very seriously. The fact that they aren’t pausing for the DOJ sounds like they actually want to resolve the matter in a timely fashion.
I won’t hang by the neck waiting for a conclusion to this - it’s likely to take until 2025, when Santos is overwhelmingly re-elected.
I kid, I kid… or do I?
Anyone have an opinion why Santos played coy about who put up the money for his bail bond?
Besides, it’s ancient history. Americans want to look forward, not back.
If those Dems could move quickly to say he should be kicked out, I think they would. But as know they can’t.
The simplest answer is that he wanted to hint that he had major GOP donors supporting him. “My Dad, and my Aunt” doesn’t have quite the same ring to it.
His Dad and his Aunt were not the original source. Bet on it.
Yeah, I didn’t mention that because we don’t know yet (AFAIK), but there’s someone or some group that hasn’t surfaced yet.
Yeah, a GQP representative who got the job by lying to his constituents, stealing money, and fabricating a fraudulent resume. He hs no business in the “People’s House,” but perhaps the “big house” (prison).
Methinks l’il George Anthony Devolder Santos ain’t gonna last long enough to earn that pension. Good riddance.
Yeah, when I read that my first question was, “Where did they get the money?” Santos seemed to be barely solvent before he got the gig in the Capitol, so it would seem odd if his relatives could just drop the cash to cover the bond without breaking a sweat.
Jordan’s got his nose down in the tea cup trying read those tea leaves. It’s a very hard job. Take the better part of 18 months to get it right.
True. But if the committee quickly finds that he has broken multiple ethics rules, that will be one more albatross to hang around McCarthy’s neck. According to the article, they’ve issued multiple subpoenas which doesn’t sound like a delay tactic. My suspicion is that there are some non-MAGA Repubs that, while too chicken shit to say publicly that Santos has to go, have made sure their sentiments have been delivered to the Republicans on the committee (some or all of whom share them).
The House has an “ethics committee”??
Praps they could go talk to the Supreme Court justices
That’s what I think, but how does it get proven?
Getting bailed out by your russian sugardaddy is not a good look, even if it might be legal. But one of the three bond backers pulled out just before thursday’s big reveal.