>

Not a Santos fan, but if lying while running for office disqualified you from serving in the House, then nobody would serve in the House.  Santos is an especially egregious example, but I don't think the lying makes the House do anything, especially with a Republican majority.  My guess is that he serves two years and the voters give him the boot, unless he gets indicted and convicted for a crime before then.
Sadly the House GOP will do nothing with such a slim majority.  And the voters will have to wait until 2024 to vote him out, if he doesn't resign. >

The NYT just reported the Republican Nassau County District Attorney is investigating Santos. The Republicans desperately want him out in any attempt to retain the seat. They can appoint a replacement with a prayer of winning next time. >

There will be a special election more than likely.  The GOP isn't going to risk their slim majority on the hope of winning a special election.  Especially after this shit storm. >

The majority is slim, but not that slim. They can afford to lose one seat. And McCarthy surely can’t expel him until after he wins leadership. I think if he just keeps his cards close to his chest he will have the option. >

You've seen how the Democrat senate struggled against Manchin and Sinema right? The House Republicans are treating Sinema as their role model, all of them want a pound of flesh from the Speaker. Personal concessions on everything. 
Their majority isn't that slim, but their party unity is over. >

“Their party unity is over.”
I have heard that prediction so many times before. It never works out that way.
This is less contentious than the battle for House GOP leadership was in 2017. And just like 2017, the Republicans will fall into line and support their leadership. >

How at all is it less contentious than 2017? As of right now, 5 days before the new congress is sworn in: Kevin McCarthy doesn’t even have the votes to be speaker of the house >

The newest black eye for George is questions about accuracy of mandatory campaign financing, both for 2020 and 2022. Lying on these statements are a crime. 
Prosecutors in New York are looking if any crimes have been committed. >

I’d argue they are the district court with the most power >

In the country yea, definitely. >

As far as the voters, there’s two fallouts from this. The obvious one is, what kind of electoral backlash there will be against Santos; I suspect that if he doesn’t resign he’ll be successfully primaried in two years. The second fallout is, how no one else did the due diligence to uncover this earlier. Not just the GOP, but the press (one local paper did a little bit of coverage before the elections on the fiscal irregularities, but newsday and the NYC dailies didn’t pick up on it), as well as the democrats for lousy oppo research. Institutions all around failing to do the basics, so even less trust in those institutions. >

If it comes out the company he had for only a year and brought in millions in business was somehow used to funnel campaign contributions, that will likely result in criminal charges in which case he'll be pressured to resign by his own party (the GOP won't want to expel him themselves, although they might if he gets convicted). If it wasn't and he just lied about everything, he'll probably keep digging his heels in like he is now and get primaried/beaten in 2 years. >

I'm curious about money laundering potential.. from Bolsinero (perhaps)  which would be multiple crimes. >

Republicans in the House do not want him ousted, he himself has no shame so he will stay just like many other disgraced Republican until his constituency gives him the boot. Some, including, one Republican requested an ethics investigation; many Democrats have requested the same and DOJ may investigate whether he broke any laws with respect to his fund-raising.    If he had any shame, he would have resigned on his own. >

I terminate people I’ve hired if they lied on their resume why should our government be different. 
If they lied and cheated I don’t want them working for me. >


I terminate people I’ve hired if they lied on their resume why should our government be different.

because this particular government position is an elected one; the people in his district hired him. 
he's accountable to his constituency, if they care, they'll do something about it.. >

True, but there's no mechanism for his constituency to do anything about it until the next election. >

What about a recall election.  Enough signatures on a petition should get that done. >

Members of Congress cannot be recalled. >

Thanks.  I wonder what McCarthy or whoever is chosen to herd the cats in the Republican led House will do with this Liar. >

If I were in the house I'd be inclined to vote for him to be expelled.  I'd want to do some investigating first, and triplecheck everything, as well as giving him a chance to make counter-arguments.
But I have high standards; it's harder to say what 'should' an institution do.  Generally speaking, I think accountability and consequences make things better. >

It's a weird sort of in between problem, in my opinion, because he hasn't actually taken office yet.  So no one can do anything right now because he has met the Constitutional minimal to be seated.  The question then is, should the House expel him for actions taken before he was a Congressman?  This is a bit less obvious than if he committed financial fraud while in office or whatnot, I think.
(The parallel I'm sort of thinking of is Alcee Hastings, who was a federal judge, was impeached and removed from office, and then subsequently elected to Congress.  I think the belief at the time was that the voters knew about all that and elected him anyway, although the obvious rejoinder is that the whole point of this scandal is that people didn't know until after the election.) >

Please do not submit low investment content. This subreddit is for genuine discussion. Low effort content, including memes, links substituting for explanation, sarcasm, and non-substantive contributions will be removed per moderator discretion. >

Please do not submit low investment content. This subreddit is for genuine discussion. Low effort content, including memes, links substituting for explanation, sarcasm, and non-substantive contributions will be removed per moderator discretion. >

If nothing else, this probably just skyrocketed his chances for re-election in his district among his Republican voters because so much attention is being drawn to it; they probably feel as though it's the "libs being owned" and are 100% on board with it.
But that's just my speculation based on six years of spite. >

It is a Biden+10 district in New York, it’s not some random trump+35 seat in Kansas or Utah… >

It really is a testament to how badly Democrats in NY fumbled the bag that this dude won in a Biden +10 seat by nearly double digits. 
Outperformed Biden by nearly 20 points. In a national environment that was basically even. >

Exactly, and Kathy Hochul has proven exactly why she’s the worst possible person to lead the party in that state. >

Democrats in general have been losing steam in NY after Cuomo. His gun rights law was especially bad for upstate.  
I have a feeling it's going to flip if the Republicans nominate a moderate Republican to office. The kind of people New England likes to elect. >

He raised money based on lies- thats fraud. He should be prosecuted and forced out of office. A new special election can be held. >

Are we going to do this for every elected official who lies?  How easy is it to throw a Presidential election? >

There are major differences here. This guy completely made up who he was, who his family was, etc. to appeal specifically to voters in his district. While not illegal, completely unethical. You have to ask those voters, knowing what they do about him now, would they still vote to elect him? My guess is the majority would not. 
This doesn't take into account where he suddenly got all this money from that he didn't have 3 years ago. >

Who gets to decide which lies are worth ignoring vs which lies are enough to get removed from his office? >

The house ethics office >

As a die hard Republican, I feel he should be removed from office if it is egregious as they say.  There are a lot of scumbags in congress on the right and left who should be removed. >

Joe Biden has repeatedly lied about his past on numerous occasions. 


He never grew up in a ghetto.


He was not raised by Puerto Ricans.


He supported Strom Thurmond and proposed a number of racist laws in the 1970s.


The laptop held by the FBI that he claimed was Russian disinformation has been verified to belong to his son Hunter.


Hunter Biden's emails from the laptop verify, on a number of occasions, that the reason he was appointed to the position was to funnel money to Joe Biden who was the sitting VP at the time.


The former point is also true of Hunter Biden's actions in China.


Joe Biden never participated in Black Panthers, and his association with Strom Thurmond definitely indicates the fact that it would be extremely unlikely that such a thing would have ever occurred.


Once someone takes action on those issues with our sitting POTUS and they get resolved, then we can certainly start talking about other politicians. >

He should be treated the same as any other prospective employee who lied on their CV to obtain a position or promotion. >

Sounds nice, but the Constitution makes no provisions for that. >

pedantically it does imho:
there's a reason for catchall provisions that can handle any sort of misconduct without enumerating all the different kinds.
Art 1 Section 5:
Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.
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. >

Yes but the house is republican and can't afford to lose a single member so they will do nothing >

Correct. The GOP no longer has any integrity as a party. They will sit this guy and likely not even bother with an ethics investigation, which is just bullshit anyway. >

Nothing unless he has committed financial crimes as well (which is likely).  But this should be his only term in Congress. >

Greg Gianforte was convicted of assault and still kept his seat. By comparison, Santos didn't do anything illegal nor as blatantly nefarious - he's not going anywhere. >

McCarthy won't do anything to upset the slim majority that the Republicans have over the democrats.  McCarthy is too political. >

I’m in his district and the best I can do is make sure that I call or email his office and hold his fear to the fire with every lie and decision.  When it comes time for him to be re-elected I am going to be volunteering and screaming at the Democratic Party to out more money and energy into this district. I am so pissed off that a POS like him is representing me. >

Be angry but keep in mind it's the voters that fucked up more than anyone else. Santos was openly a Trump-Taylor Greene type. He didn't lie about what he really was. >

i know. sadly i live in a maga area of NY. they would vote for satan if he had an R by his name >

Can’t wait for the car parades to start up again. Sigh. >

i’m going to the gym to make sure my middle finger has maximum endurance. >

He has zero chance of re-election.  Every Jew in New York will be spitting on his campaign posters.  If the Republican party is smart, they'll replace him somehow.  But they'd rather keep him for the short-term benefits of having one more vote. >

That has been their MO for quite some time now, short term gain for long term pain.  He destroyed his political career before it took off.  This is also going to damage the republican party in that location as well. >

I vote mostly Republican (except for Jimmy Carter) and I say remove him from office.
If I lie on my job resume, I get fired.
If I lie on my citizenship application, I get deported. If I lie on my firearm application, I don’t get the gun. If I lie on my mortgage application, I don’t get the house. If I lie to the insurance company, they decline coverage.
And so on. Liars and embellishers can’t be trusted. There should be zero tolerance. >

Please do not submit low investment content. This subreddit is for genuine discussion. Low effort content, including memes, links substituting for explanation, sarcasm, and non-substantive contributions will be removed per moderator discretion. >

It’s New York. Honest people who go into politics get crushed like grapes, while thieves in suits get first dibs on the tastiest parts of the budget and whatever legislative interns of whom they demand jus primae noctis privileges. 
We’re not upset he lied. We’re upset he’s not serious about the craft.