House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) said Tuesday he would like the House Ethics Committee to move rapidly and come back to Congress with a decision on whether the embattled Rep. George Santos (R-NY) should be expelled from the House of Representatives.
Kevin “He’s a moron” McCarthy will do anything to rid himself of the nuisance called George Santos. “There’s enough facts.” And he doesn’t want the stink of Santos left behind to imperil his sterling and almost surely short-lived career.
@uneducated A word on a Scrabble board worth eight points.
In normal times Santos would have been gone months ago. If Speaker McCarthy had any ethics at all Santos would have been gone months ago.
Santos has confessed to theft. It should make no difference in judging his fitness to be a Representative that the theft involved was committed in Brazil rather than the US. What matters is what he did not where he did it.
Santos has certainly put McCarthy into an uncomfortable position. He has to walk the line between actually doing something that would cause Santos to be kicked out of the House (as he fully deserves), or somehow openly acknowledging Santos’ complete unsuitability for public office while not actually getting rid of the guy at the expense of his precious and precarious majority.
Santos and McCarthy (and the rest of the GOP House caucus) fully and completely deserve each other. Interesting to speculate about how many other Santos’ outrages will surface in the future.
Here’s one difference between this Speaker and the previous Speaker, Pelosi. When she learned NY Congressman Anthony Weiner was sending dick pix to a young girl, she told him he had to resign and he did, promising he’d get treatment.
I’m surprised McQ didn’t say the ethics committee should do at most a preliminary investigation. Based on the evidence gathered so far, Congress does not have any actual evidence of the 13 crimes he’s been charged with. (h/t “Bull” Durham)
It does make a difference that the theft was committed 15 years ago when he was 19 years old. There’s plenty of real shit to hit georgie-boy with, you don’t need to reach.
If Santos had confessed publicly that he had committed theft as a youth and the voters chose to elect him anyway I’d agree: They can judge if he reformed.
In this instance, although old, he escaped prosecution because he fled the jurisdiction and has only recently confessed. That confession means we have him dead to rights from his own lips on what he did so there is no need to wait for a court outcome.
Yeah, because the law says that every candidate for federal office must “confess” to every stupid thing they did in their youth. It’s right there in the consitution.
And knock it off with the “confessed”. He didn’t confess to shit; he did the brazilian equivalent of a plea deal.