comment: >
  
  
  I will certainly not believe this until I see it happen
  
  Here's what fellow Republican and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer will say:
  They'll remove Santos once he's convicted of criminal campaign finance laws. 
  Because Comer knows it will take more than 2 years for authorities to investigate the infractions, then to file charges, and then take him to trial and get a conviction. 
  It will be way past Nov 2024 before there's any resolution and there's no way Santos gets reëlected.  
  They're playing the old GQP Rope-a-Dope and running out the clock to keep their majority until the next election.
context: Is hiring an impersonator of McCarthy’s Chief of Staff to call people and bilk them out of donations, not “breaking campaign, finance laws?” >
  
  We don’t even know if his name really is George santos >
  
  I think it's fair and legit to ask for his birth certificate. >
  
  House of Representatives actually have a Constitutional requirement to be a US citizen for at least seven years. This should literally have to be verified for all US Reps, not just Santos. As much as the Republicans scream about respecting the Constitution, you would think enforcement of this would have been enacted by now. >
  
  I mean Trump's currently the most likely Republican candidate for 2024 and he outright called for the Constitution to be got rid of. >
  
  If they take the 2nd amendment with it, I could maybe get behind it. /s >
  
  Yeah, it’s not a particularly good constitution by modern standards. I’d move a lot of “state” power (and Senate stuff) to something more natural. Like watershed legislatures might be a good one. Some sort of fundamental shared interest that isn’t “We drew these lines in the 1800’s and now we’re stuck with them.” And move most “state level” power to local governments. 
  States can still exist for college football purposes but there’s really no modern reason states west of like Connecticut have the lines they do. (And Delaware doesn’t get to be a state. They wanted to register every corporation and use toll bridges to mooch off other states so that’s what they’re gonna get. It’s an offshore banking island now even if we have to dredge a new canal to make it fully offshore. They’ll be happy because they’ll have a whole new waterway to make toll bridges over to make people driving between DC to NYC fund their government.)
  EDIT: I originally said east of Connecticut but I meant west. My point was just that states make increasingly less sense in a modern context the more west you get from New England, basically. >
  
  
  east of like Connecticut
  
  So… Rhode Island and Maine? >
  
  I meant west. >
  
  I was teasing. <3 >
  
  Comer is referring to a criminal conviction.  Like we've seen from Jeff Fortenberry, Bob Menendez, Chris Collins, Chaka Fattah, etc. recently, when you get indicted, you get kicked off committees. And if you get convicted, you're expected to resign.  And if you don't, which we haven't seen since Jim Traficant, you're expelled. >
  
  Ahh, Traficant. My local rep from back in the day. Paid by all the mobs. Fuckin Legend in Youngstown >
  
  I expected like the 1950's or something but damn that was recent. >
  
  Investigated by the house ethics committee you say?
  "We have looked into the matter involving ourselves and found nothing illegal was committed." >
  
  What House Ethics Committee? The GOP is gutting it. >
  
  So what would happen to his seat if he was removed? >
  
  New election in his district >
  
  Probably followed by Santos changing his name yet again and trying to run under a different name to scam the voters in that district yet again >
  
  I live in Majorie Taylor Greene’s district and have thought of changing my name to Margery Tailor Green and running against her >
  
  Please do. I would love to see someone knock her off her seat even if it is using a fake name close to hers to confuse her idiot voter base that keeps putting her in power. >
  
  To be fair, she ran unopposed the first time because she intimidated her opponent and his family until he quit and moved out of GA. The man who ran against her this time, Marcus Flowers, did a good job but that district will never elect a black man. They need a white male opponent to beat her. Or she can go to prison and not be able to run. >
  
  A white guy isn't gonna help in that district.  Jesus Himself could run against her, and her voters would still reelect her. >
  
  tbf he got within 500 votes of toppling her >
  
  I will certainly not believe this until I see it happen. >
  
  
  I will certainly not believe this until I see it happen
  
  Here's what fellow Republican and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer will say:
  They'll remove Santos once he's convicted of criminal campaign finance laws. 
  Because Comer knows it will take more than 2 years for authorities to investigate the infractions, then to file charges, and then take him to trial and get a conviction. 
  It will be way past Nov 2024 before there's any resolution and there's no way Santos gets reëlected.  
  They're playing the old GQP Rope-a-Dope and running out the clock to keep their majority until the next election. >
  
  If they Justice system can't provide justice in a timely manner, that's a dangerous thing for those being accused of crimes, especially those in power.  That's the sort of thing that leads to revolution, not that I'm cheering that on.  The Justice system needs a major reform in this country especially when it comes to how those in power are investigated, prosecuted, and penalized. >
  
  
  If they Justice system can’t provide justice in a timely manner, that’s a dangerous thing for those being accused of crimes, especially those in power.
  
  Almost as though it’s been designed this way.
  
  The Justice system needs a major reform in this country especially when it comes to how those in power are investigated, prosecuted, and penalized.
  
  Absolutely.
  
  That’s the sort of thing that leads to revolution, not that I’m cheering that on.
  
  The process will be painful but, without it, I doubt we’ll ever recover from this slow death we’re caught in. >
  
  I am all for a good ol' fashioned revolution! However, it needs to have a factual basis and not rooted in the lies of one or two people.
  But yeah. Restoring order to the corruption of a government is hard. Simply pushing the ruling parties out tends to leave a nasty power vacuum that can quickly get filled by the even more corrupt. (You can't break any laws if there are no laws to break! ) >
  
  Seems like you actually aren't for a good old fashioned revolution. >
  
  “George Santos couldn’t have broken any laws” said Santos to reporters today “Because….” Santos said as he removed the mask from his face “I’m old man O’cleary from the Sawmill!” O’cleary then attempted to dramatically vanish in a cloud of smoke but accidentally set himself on fire. He is in jail awaiting trial. >
  
  I would accept this outcome >
  
  Me too, but Republicans would still back the guy for "playing the game the way it was meant to be played" and "liberals are trying to defund all sawmills". >
  
  Defund all sawmills... gave me a laugh. Sad it’s not far off the truth >
  
  If any of us apply for a job they want birth certificates, diplomas, GEDs, transcripts, background checks, the works. 
  But being in congress does not need any of that? >
  
  What jobs are you applying for? >
  
  What? Have you ever been employed in the United States? >
  
  It's been a long time, but I don't remember ever being asked for a birth certificate. Apparently it's common, though, based on my replies.
  The original comment read to me like Trump claiming you need ID to buy groceries, but perhaps I'm the out -of-touch one. >
  
  You don’t need a birth certificate you need multiple forms of ID. SS card, DL, passport, utility bill etc. Birth cert is just one of the options that meet the one requirement. >
  
  Not necessarily—you need to prove your identity and that you can legally work in the US. A passport proves both. A birth certificate or Social Security card proves that you can legally work in the US, while a Driver’s License or State ID proves your identity. >
  
  If?
  ^(Lol, dude is a walking bag of lies.) >
  
  If Trumps presidency taught us anything, it’s that we have very few official ways to punish politicians for blatantly lying. So many of our rules are based off “well, if they lie, the voters won’t stand for it” turns out thats super shitty protection from lying politicians. >
  
  Neither party? Bullshit. Democrats have forced politicians resign in the past... Republicans, not so much. >
  
  In support may I offer Al Franken as evidence. >
  
  
  "It's not up to me or any other member of Congress to determine whether he can be kicked out for lying."
  
  It's too bad they didn't get around to reading the Constitution on the first day like they said they would. If they had, he would have heard this part fairly early, in Article 1, Section 5
  
  Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member. >
  
  It’s more nefarious than that.  They know what it says and then CHOOSE not to punish him and let him continue to defraud the American people.  It’s a choice and it’s intentional by the GOP.
  Edit: Spelling sucks on mobile >
  
  It's because they are all in serious trouble if they say you need to resign from Congress if you are caught in a lie. >
  
  
  House of Representatives Speaker Kevin McCarthy has said he will leave Santos' fate to the Ethics Committee and voters
  
  But they just gutted the Ethics committee, which Georgie said was “fantastic”. Way to take the easy one out >
  
  This is the house speaker's reason for being, the whole republican party can be calling for Santos' ouster, and Mccarthy can take the heat by not removing him. Whatever they say is worthless, watch what they do. >
  
  Yup. They say stuff for headlines knowing that people will see them and the majority will believe them and move on and never realize there was no follow-up. It's like how Fox News and other propaganda networks purposefully report lies on the 24/7 news cycle for 72 hours then walk them back quietly a few days later in a 30 second segment at the end of their least popular programming. People see the lie and believe it then either miss the walk back or see it and believe they were coerced and the original story is still true. >
  
  T-Minus 1 week before the republicans start saying he is a democratic plant to destabilize Republican districts in his area. >
  
  More like T-minus one week before a different Republican has a "career ending" controversy come up and this gets forgotten about by voters with no repercussions except for the occasional article on a slow news day. >
  
  Right….. didn’t Trump break a bunch of campaign finance laws….. did he ever get removed. 
  These guys are all talk. >
  
  Hard to be removed when you're the head of the mob.
  Santos has no clout. >
  
  But he's got a vote in a razor-thin House margin. 
  They won't touch him for two years. >
  
  It'll depend on how quickly they could get a special election ready. >
  
  The GOP won't win a special election there. The electorate on Long Island got burned hard by them with Santos, they're not going to do it again so soon. There will be a Democrat in that seat after any special election, if not in 2024 during the next  regular cycle. >
  
  People don't usually switch parties.  If most of the voters in the area are Republican, they'll vote for the next Republican. >
  
  Maybe Mccarthy got pissed Santos had a dude impersonate his chief of staff to steal his donor money. >
  
  Lol, McCarthy standing up to someone on principle. 
  That's a hilarious mental image, thanks for that. >
  
  I'm fairly certain that McCarthy has a steel rod built into his suit jackets to make up for the lack of spine he actually has. >
  
  He used to, but the rods became limp and flexible within days. This is an active area of research material scientists, who are working with the evolutionary biologists to quantify a rare spineless vertebrate. >
  
  He’s also a wanted criminal. He’s wanted in Brazil for failure to appear in court for check fraud. >
  
  The sad thing is that no matter what happens to him he'll take credit for writing a book about it all and sell it for more money than most of us will ever have. >
  
  He's also got those fat Russian oligarchs giving him money, which most of us also will never have. (And those of us that are not traitors, do not want.) >
  
  The fact that he hasn’t been already says enough, but the Republicans should never be allowed to forget they relied on him for one stupid vote >
  
  How is "lying about everything including, maybe, his name" not breaking campaign laws? >
  
  Can remove George Santos
  But 
  Can't remove Anthony Devolder (other name he used)
  *Taps temple
  Such a joke he was even able to walk into congress >
  
  Especially since his Republican bosses in his New York district knew he was a walking lie over a month before the election even took place. Party over country, always for those fascist treasonous trash. >
  
  
  "It's not up to me or any other member of Congress to determine whether he can be kicked out for lying.
  
  Yes, it is. That's the exact reason that there is a fucking process for the removal of a congressperson.
  It's right in the fucking constitution, which none of these chucklefucks seem to have read:
  
  Article I, Section 5, Clause 2:
  Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member. >
  
  But ONLY if it was campaign finance laws.
  Nothing about the obvious lack of character and integrity. GOP is all about being shitty. >
  
  There is only one way Santos will be removed from Congress, and that is if he is secretly a Democrat. >
  
  Well based on how honest he's been so far he very well could be.  
  Calm down angry down voters, I just meant he's lied about everything else so why not party affiliation too? >
  
  That would be funny and, honestly, one way to get more Democrats in Congress if they could get past the primary. >
  
  Only Congress themselves can remove someone from Congress with a 2/3 majority and do you think that is going to happen with the current Republicans in Congress?
  The answer is no. >
  
  They’ll make him head of the gutted ethics committee. >
  
  Santos--or Devolder, or whatever his name is--is so used to lying that he won't mind pressure over it.  He'll just lie more. >
  
  He was married to a woman but is obviously gay. Immigration scam? >
  
  Wait, he isnt gay? >
  
  Just since his marriage a year ago. I think he is straight around straight people, Catholic around Catholic people, Jewish around Jewish people poor around poor people, rich around rich people. You know a lier or you can also use republican. >
  
  That's Jew-ish. >
  
  That would require Republicans to actually have a sense of morality and respect for laws. But we all know their motto "rules for thee, not for me." >
  
  If? More like did. >
  
  It’s wild that the lying is not enough. >
  
  Trump showed the nutcases and extremists that the American voter will vote R no matter what and there is pretty much no bottom for behavior. >
  
  Just shows how's broken the American system is. >
  
  I for one want to see his birth certificate >
  
  Remember that whole drama the Republicans, actually Trump, with Obama’s birth certificate.  The Republicans should make it an issue with this guy who has constantly lied about his past, the names he uses for himself, etc.  I reiterate KazooDumpins, I would like to see his Birth Certificate. >
  
  He's in a district that's winnable for a Democrat. He's not going to be leaving anytime soon and they aren't going to force him to leave. >
  
  Yeah okay, I will fucking believe that when I see it. 
  I think it is more likely we will see him move up in Republican leader ship, and I am not joking about thalt >
  
  A politician going to jail for fraud?  That's absolutely unheard of in America.  I'll believe it when I see it. >
  
  Campaign finance laws?  Isn’t lying, stealing, cheating and just downright fraudulent good enough? Should have NEVER been allowed into congress to begin with. This is what it has come to in this country >
  
  Treasonous QAnon seditionists who helped lead the Jan 6 insurrection are still in Congress >
  
  Lying and unqualified? This is fine. 
  Fucking with the money? Grounds for removal. >
  
  My prediction, he did and he won't be. >
  
  This.  You know damn well they won’t touch him no matter what he did or will do. >
  
  Comer can express his own opinion all he wants, but it requires two-thirds of the House to remove a Member. That's 292 votes. I assume all Democrats would vote to expel him, which means 80 Republicans have to agree. The article says McCarthy wants to leave the decision up to "the Ethics Committee and the voters." The second part of that sentence tells me McCarthy doesn't want to use the House's power to expel a Member and will instead claim the only "democratic" way to remove him is for the voters to express their will (leaving aside the fact that the Constitution expressly permits each house of Congress to remove their own members with a two-thirds vote, regardless of what voters think). >
  
  Unless/until he is jailed or dies, he will serve his full term. >
  
  Fuck the Supreme Court, they fucked this country with Citizens United. >
  
  He's a Republican so their voters could care less about laws broken, morals or ethics.. They only care that there is an R before their name. Republican Voters would vote in a potato if it has an R in its name... >
  
  Trump broke campaign finance laws. He wasn't removed from office, or the presidential ballot, nor has he been banned from running again.
  I have very little faith of anything happening here. >
  
  matt gaetz and george santos went on steve bannon's podcast, where gaetz played the victim card for santos, saying "they come for the fighters", and santos said "I've worked an honest life"
  meanwhile, the repubs have pretty much emasculated the ethics committee.  that's par for the course. >
  
  Doubt anything would happen, these people never really face any consequences >
  
  Didn't I read somewhere that he accepted campaign donations from a Russian oligarch? Maybe that oligarch had duel citizenship or something. >
  
  Trump committed campaign finance fraud. That won't stop them from supporting him. They already knew Santos was lying about his background and didn't say a word prior to his election. The GOP is just plain corrupt. >
  
  If this guy can stay in congress, I suggest some of us  run for a republican seat talking all kinds of maga bs talking points. Ultra maga even. Then when we get sworn in, vote straight Democrat. What are they going to do? >
  
  He's a fucking creepy looking goofball. >
  
  Le sigh. Only financial fraud can get you kicked out. Not actually lying about your past. Smdh >
  
  if they can remove him for campaign finance violations they can remove all of them >
  
  Cut this cancer out before it's too late. >
  
  What is wrong with any of you in thinking this is important when somewhere, RIGHT NOW, Hunter Biden has a big dick??
  /s >
  
  Good, fuck him and throw him in prison >
  
  I'll believe it when I see it. At this point it isn't a case of 'if' he broke the law, it's a matter of how much and how often. >
  
  No he won't. Republicans will carve out exception after exception to keep him in that seat. >
  
  Why is he still there to begin with??? >
  
  Yeah I’m not holding my breath >
  
  So it increasingly looks like the concern with Obama’s birth certificate, the worry about immigration, and the issue of so-called fraudulent voting were all deliberate misdirections by Republicans to get out and in front of their wider campaign to cheat and steal elections by accusing their opponents of their own misdeeds. >
  
  He can’t just be swiftly removed right now because we don’t know who he really is? This country is set up like garbage >
  
  Dude is a national security risk because he has totally misrepresented himself and his resources. He is a con artist who will defraud us all if he’s not ousted asap. Republicans should try to find even a shred, a SPECK of integrity, and get rid of this fucker, but there is no bottom with those power hungry scum bags. >
  
  Why isn’t considers abuse of funds to raise the funds under false pretenses? >
  
  George Santos invented campaign finance laws >
  
  Well, good thing Anthony Devolder was in charge of the campaign financing. 
  /s >
  
  He’s a republican. Republicans preach personal responsibility, but never follow through. 
  Nothing is going to happen to this guy. >
  
  Ha ha, this is who we hold accountable. This is equivalent to Ghislaine Maxwell getting 20 years meanwhile Epstien dies and the rest of the high-ranking public officials and  pedophile were never mentioned in public. Or a traitor to who caused a violent attack on our Capitol Jan 6th, who was also involved with Epstien. We have pictures and video! >
  
  So they are telling us the public that the only thing that matters is money...not ethics. >
  
  I’ll believe it when I see it. >
  
  It doesn't matter if he's guilty of ANYTHING. He could be an illegal immigrant for all we know, and the GOP will fight TOOTH AND NAIL not to lose that seat. The only thing they hate more than immigrants, non-whites, non-Christian, and poor people, is not having power. >
  
  Nothing was an issue until he messed with the rich people’s money. >
  
  What happens to his seat if this is the case? Will they do a special election open to all parties, or automatically select a new Republican to fill the seat? >
  
  I think it depends on the laws of the state. Some states do a special election, some have the governor appoint someone new. >
  
  The Constitution mandates an election for filling House vacancies. Vacancies in the Senate are handled on a state-by-state basis like you describe.
  
  When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies. >
  
  I’ll believe it when I see it >
  
  Then another republican similar to him will be elected. The cycle repeats. >
  
  One thing GOP cares about more than anything is their money. >
  
  I'll believe it when I see it. Has any incoming congressman ever been so obviously guilty of blatant and outright fraud and faced consequences? >
  
  I would be surprised if Comer is able to convince his colleagues that Santos needs to be removed.  As we've seen since Trump took power seven years ago, nothing in the Trump party matters anymore unless it relates to a Biden.  Maintaining power at all costs, no principles. >
  
  Term is 2 years, maybe there is enough outrage to get this moved through the investigative and court processes in a timely manner, but I'm not holding my breath.
  Republicans will never voluntarily remove him no matter how damning any public evidence is. >
  
  If Santos’s is removed and let’s say a few Republican congressman get arrested for a coup is it possible democrats take the majority in the house? How does that work? >
  
  I’ll believe it when I see it >
  
  Hey look the one slightly correct thing Comer said on State of the Union. The rest of the interview he was a straight up moron and kept acting like Trump/Biden’s document handling were similar. Investigating Hunter but not Kushner too? >
  
  House Republicans will broker a deal with George Santos, permitting him to remain seated under strict enforcement that he henceforth permanently adopt the persona of Anthony Devolder --- an honest, college graduate and volleyball sensation who quickly became a financial powerhouse, whose previous partners and roommates say nothing but great things about him, and who is committed to listening to constituents of the NY 3rd Congressional District. >
  
  I want to believe this but based on the last 6 years I just can’t >
  
  
  It's not up to me or any other member of Congress to determine whether he can be kicked out for lying. 
  
  Yes it is. Your party can kick him out for any reason at any time with a 2/3rds vote. >
  
  IF ???  That’s the (R) metric?  My former party has forfeited it’s right to hold office >
  
  Blatantly lie about your life and your accomplishments? No problem. 
  Fuck with the money? You're going down. >
  
  GOP won't risk losing a seat. He won't be removed. >
  
  Yeah ok.  
  Sure.
  Just like Trump will ever see the inside of a jail cell.
  How about people stop talking about this, and start making it happen. >
  
  Santos is fine… he will just assume a new identity and stay in office.
  Checkmate libs >
  
  I still think it’s hysterical that moderates voted for him. Personally, i think they should keep him, a testament to how people vote demographics or whether certain checkboxes were filled instead of like a history of being committed to change. 
  Stop being idiots and you wouldn’t have had him. >
  
  Yeah right… the gop doesn’t even remotely care about this shit as long as he votes the way they want him too >
  
  Translation: he’s not politically useful to us, nor connected enough, nor has dirt on us, so we can kick him to the curb because he is inconvenient to us. No morals involved. >
  
  Old scruples: a feeling of doubt or hesitation with regard to the morality or propriety of a course of action.
  New scruples: whatever. >
  
  I think senator scape-goat was brought in to take heat off the other gop circus clowns. >
  
  Ooh! Ooh!  Do the whole room! >
  
  They can’t get rid of him. His grift is just beginning. >
  
  "could" "if" "should" "might" .... These are the headlines that we were pummeled by all during Trump's reign too. Let me know when it happens. Til then, I'm not gonna get all excited about any of it. It's just clickbait headlines to tell people pretty much nothing is happening yet. >
  
  Yes....any day now /s >
  
  I mean.  
  They probably will have to speak his True Name to exorcise him. >
  
  Riiight...Pull the other one.  It has got bells on. >
  
  Hes a mentally ill power twat. >
  
  If? >
  
  James Comer is so hard for his investigation of "The Biden Crime Family" that he could give two shits and a fuck less about anything else. Also, James Comer and Gym Jordan share the same functioning brain cell. >
  
  No he wont. >
  
  I will believe it when I see it. >
  
  I'll believe it when it happens. >
  
  They’re lowering their he bar to keep him. Don’t fall for this shit. Call your congressperson. Tell them his blatantly lying to his constituents leaves no room for discussion on keeping him sitting in a seat. >
  
  Or whatever his name turns out to be >
  
  It’s very Democratic of him to say he’ll only resign if he loses the next election. That’s what you do if you lose the election. Well not the Cult leader and followers. >
  
  It's only a matter of time before Sasha Baron Cohen dupes Republican voters and fills a seat in Congress >
  
  Honestly campaign finance law is engineered to be almost impossible to break. >
  
  If he doesn't get removed for all of the lies then apparently you don't have to tell even a sliver of truth to run pur country. Syaing the quiet part out loud is a terrible precedent. >
  
  Uh huh, I’ll believe it when I see it.
  The last Republican to care about campaign finance laws was McCain. >
  
  He’s not getting removed. Nothing matters anymore since 45 got elected. >
  
  No way this dude told all those lies but actually followed campaign finance laws lol >
  
  I’m sure he did. 
  I’m sure he won’t. >
  
  So they were OK with all of those other red flags, but don't mess around with campaign finance rules?!?! >
  
  After he lied about anything and everything he still got sworn in. He shouldn't have been sworn in to begin with. >
  
  I don't have the verbage to describe this guy. >
  
  Why should there be a question of removal? This lying disgusting pig belongs in Prison and not in Congress! >
  
  Just one of the psychopaths in the republican party these days. >
  
  Lol zero chance in hell even if he did! That's just about the least enforced set of laws in existence. >
  
  Comer is still a piece of shit. >
  
  Now do the literal fucking insurrectionists >
  
  Please get it done already and kick him in the nuts on the way out! >
  
  Can we be sure he had enough time as a US Citizen before becoming a Congressman? He needs 7 years as a citizen and at least 25 years old. We should be now asking what is TRUE about George Santos not what is a lie. We have seen little truth from or about George Santos. Why won't any federal body ensure he is qualified to retain this congressional seat? Does anyone in D C. care enough about Republicans' qualifications to spend time investigating Mr. Santos >
  
  Does this guy even need glasses, are there even lenses in those frames? Lies all lies!!! >
  
  Right, right. And, Trump will go to jail for conspiring and sedition. >
  
  I doubt it lol, these corrupt goons never face any consequences >
  
  God just look at that booger eater, needs to be licking white dog shit in all his lies >
  
  Is this guy a Russian plant!? Definitely plausible >
  
  Not really, mainly since he has criminal charges in Brazil. His operations manager, on the other hand… >
  
  "Age-restricted adult content. This content might not be appropriate for people under 18 years old. To view this media, you’ll need to log in to Twitter."
  I'm curious, got a screen cap? >
  
  Damn, Elon really out here censoring the truth. Regardless, I posted a screencap over in /r/WhitePeopleTwitter. >
  
  gracias, it's hard to figure out what part of that is NSFW >
  
  The part that Musk doesn’t want people knowing about. >
  
  There’s no rule that prevents an indicted or convicted member of Congress from continuing to hold their seat.
  The only way to “remove” a member of the House is to expel them, which requires a 2/3 majority, which I doubt will happen.
  First of all, any investigation is going to take at least 2 years, by which time Santos will have served his term.
  And second of all, I highly doubt there would be enough votes to actually expel him. A 2/3 supermajority is 290 votes. With 212 Democrats in the House, that’s a LOT of Republican votes required to approve the expulsion. >
  
  But it’s ok to lie to the public >
  
  It's not, that's the point >
  
  As a Brazilian I am PROUD that our country is represented and encapsulated so perfectly by George Santos! You Americans could always use a little bit of lying & stealing. Our whole country's based off it ! :D 🇧🇷✨ >
  
  Removed from Congress for breaking campaign finance laws… that’ll be an interesting precedent to set. >
  
  So what would happen to his seat if he was removed? Special election in his district or just leave the seat open? >
  
  "Press F to Doubt"
  They'll just come up with some other justification for why he can do it, and keep doing the same thing. 
  I'm interested to see who among the Republiqans will throw a huge shit fit for Comer even mentioning it as a possibility. >
  
  That's X. F is to pay respect. >
  
  Ya caught me...never have played it. >
  
  I’m sure he’ll see real justice. Gtfo >
  
  That would set quite the precedent. One that I am perfectly okay with. >
  
  If? >
  
  The extreme Right wing should have forced McCarthy to wear a shirt with the word "Cuck" on it while he presides. >
  
  Yeah I'm sure something will be done. >
  
  We wouldn’t have a congress if this was the gold standard for everyone >
  
  The republican chairman from his district has already stated that Santos has ruined their chances of putting another GOP person into that seat if a Special Election were to be held.  This will certainly put the Republicans on a very thin majority margin in the house >
  
  The only way to remove a siting Congressman against his will is through expulsion, which requires 2/3 of a vote, and thus about 1/3 of the Republic vote, assuming all Democrats agree. It's very difficult to imagine that today's Republican party will take that step, without a guarantee of getting the seat back, which they don't have. >
  
  Best news I've heard all day. Thank you Comer! >
  
  So, republicans aren't concerned about ethics...just money. This makes that all the more clear. >
  
  This man is the culmination of GOP today. No knowledge of governance and no interest in learning. Party over people. Such a liar - bet he's not even gay. >
  
  Honest question, if he is removed, who is the Speaker of the House?  The margin was razor thin, and without this fraud it may never have been settled. >
  
  Not IF because >
  
  No bar low enough that a republican cannot slither under it >
  
  "If"? >
  
  Always about money. Wtf. He’s a lying pos. >
  
  Is hiring an impersonator of McCarthy’s Chief of Staff to call people and bilk them out of donations, not “breaking campaign, finance laws?” >
  
  We don’t even know if his name really is George santos >
  
  I think it's fair and legit to ask for his birth certificate. >
  
  House of Representatives actually have a Constitutional requirement to be a US citizen for at least seven years. This should literally have to be verified for all US Reps, not just Santos. As much as the Republicans scream about respecting the Constitution, you would think enforcement of this would have been enacted by now. >
  
  I mean Trump's currently the most likely Republican candidate for 2024 and he outright called for the Constitution to be got rid of. >
  
  If they take the 2nd amendment with it, I could maybe get behind it. /s >
  
  Yeah, it’s not a particularly good constitution by modern standards. I’d move a lot of “state” power (and Senate stuff) to something more natural. Like watershed legislatures might be a good one. Some sort of fundamental shared interest that isn’t “We drew these lines in the 1800’s and now we’re stuck with them.” And move most “state level” power to local governments. 
  States can still exist for college football purposes but there’s really no modern reason states west of like Connecticut have the lines they do. (And Delaware doesn’t get to be a state. They wanted to register every corporation and use toll bridges to mooch off other states so that’s what they’re gonna get. It’s an offshore banking island now even if we have to dredge a new canal to make it fully offshore. They’ll be happy because they’ll have a whole new waterway to make toll bridges over to make people driving between DC to NYC fund their government.)
  EDIT: I originally said east of Connecticut but I meant west. My point was just that states make increasingly less sense in a modern context the more west you get from New England, basically. >
  
  
  east of like Connecticut
  
  So… Rhode Island and Maine? >
  
  I meant west. >
  
  I was teasing. <3 >
  
  Comer is referring to a criminal conviction.  Like we've seen from Jeff Fortenberry, Bob Menendez, Chris Collins, Chaka Fattah, etc. recently, when you get indicted, you get kicked off committees. And if you get convicted, you're expected to resign.  And if you don't, which we haven't seen since Jim Traficant, you're expelled. >
  
  Ahh, Traficant. My local rep from back in the day. Paid by all the mobs. Fuckin Legend in Youngstown >
  
  We Youngstonians remember Jimbo, indeed... "beam me up, Scotty." >
  
  Hey I’ve been to Youngstown! My cousin did like 5 years there back in the 90’s. >
  
  Yep, for those who know Youngstown this story checks out 100%. >
  
  Investigated by the house ethics committee you say?
  "We have looked into the matter involving ourselves and found nothing illegal was committed." >
  
  What House Ethics Committee? The GOP is gutting it. >
  
  So what would happen to his seat if he was removed? >
  
  New election in his district >
  
  Probably followed by Santos changing his name yet again and trying to run under a different name to scam the voters in that district yet again >
  
  I live in Majorie Taylor Greene’s district and have thought of changing my name to Margery Tailor Green and running against her >
  
  Please do. I would love to see someone knock her off her seat even if it is using a fake name close to hers to confuse her idiot voter base that keeps putting her in power. >
  
  To be fair, she ran unopposed the first time because she intimidated her opponent and his family until he quit and moved out of GA. The man who ran against her this time, Marcus Flowers, did a good job but that district will never elect a black man. They need a white male opponent to beat her. Or she can go to prison and not be able to run. >
  
  A white guy isn't gonna help in that district.  Jesus Himself could run against her, and her voters would still reelect her. >
  
  tbf he got within 500 votes of toppling her >
  
  I will certainly not believe this until I see it happen.