comment: >
  
  The only way this gets funnier is if we find out the way he made his money was entirely off scamming donors and the RNC during his previous campaign.
context: And likely lied on his FEC financial disclosures, under penalty of perjury. >
  
  I remember learning from Jared Kushner that you are permitted to amend those as many times as you want.  As people learn of inconsistencies, they get disclosed.  There is no penalty for this. >
  
  You are thinking of security clearances. >
  
  Thank you.  So security clearances are lower level than applications for these positions?  I oberthink clearance. >
  
  
  In April 2022, Santos provided a different description of Devolder to the Daily Beast. He reported that he had created Devolder to help “all the people who were left adrift” after Harbor City was charged by the SEC. He also said that Devolder had by then been dissolved. The Daily Beast also reported that Devolder was one of several stakeholders in Red Strategies USA, a consulting firm that did work for Tina Forte, a QAnon-ish challenger to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). 
  So, what was Devolder? An assets management firm handling his family’s supposed wealth? Or something else connected to political campaigning? 
  
  This guy's story gets more interesting by the day. >
  
  It's been by the hour today! >
  
  (russians) >
  
  +1 on Russian money. He's very likely an agent (correction: asset) that the Russians put together, especially with that completely fake bio/resume that he can't even get right. >
  
  At this point, I wouldn't be too surprised if it's revealed that his name isn't even "George Santos." >
  
  Honestly half expecting Mystery Inc to set a trap and unmask him. We're going to find out it's Putin under a mask. >
  
  He'd have gotten away with it if not for those damn kids and their fucking dog >
  
  Zoiks! >
  
  Never change Reddit.  We love you. >
  
  My prediction is that we will learn that Santos never had millions and never will. Someone funded his campaign for the purpose of having a bought off politician. >
  
  That seems pretty obvious at this point. Question is who and why. >
  
  Russia and putin having a tiny cock >
  
  You should first look inward before declaring it a foreign cause. 
  There are numerous groups and at least one political party in the USA that would be interested and has done similar/same. >
  
  Except it's already been revealed that some of the money came from a Russian oligarch, so we're already in the territory of partially confirmed. >
  
  Oh dang. Didn’t catch that one in the slew of allegations and revelations. 
  I’d ask what GOP candidate isn’t getting money from Russian at this point. The party is completely overrun. Remember Maria Butina! >
  
  It would be nice to get records/evidence of how the money is being transferred to them.
  It's probably via corporations which the Rs conveniently made into US citizens who had free speech to give money to political candidates and parties. But, I'm just guessing. >
  
  It was a heck of a lot easier to funnel Russian money to Republicans before the NRA (mostly) blew up. >
  
  It doesn't seem to have entirely stopped though. >
  
  I honestly think most/all of the money does not exist - this is someone who lied about owning multiple properties when he in fact was getting evicted over and over, he's the kind of person who'd inflate his wealth on disclosure forms to look flashier. 
  Here in Arizona our Republican nominee for AG got his brother to loan him $1M before a financing deadline, hyped up the "massive early haul raised in Q1", and then immediately repaid the loan. This flash infusion of cash made his campaign seem more viable at the moment than it was IRL relative to primary opponents. The money did not end up getting spent by the campaign in those few days, and there's no proof it even truly existed as a transaction.
  Looking at Santos's campaign expenditure forms (I'm partially taking this from this Twitter thread, which looks at the rather slush-fundy feel of the reported expenditures from the campaign fund):
  
  
  The topline numbers Santos's campaign reports over the two campaigns he ran in were $3,374,132.81 income (I), $3,395,624.01 expenditures (E), and $43,043.23 cash on hand (COH) at the end of the last reporting cycle. This is the first case of math not adding up - I less E in this case is -$21,491.20, ~$64k less than what Santos's final report lists.
  
  
  Santos's final report claims his campaign owes $742,997.94 in debt. This math also does not make sense - his total reported loans were ($81.25k loaned - $31.2k repayed in 2020)=$50.05k debt, plus $705k ($0 repayed) in 2022...which would work out to $755,050, and not $742,997.94.
  
  
  Topline numbers also do not match with line item submissions. When you export everything to Excel, you get $3,802,971.25 reported I + $514,171.61 in unitemized small donations vs.  $2,385,496.27 E and $659,198.90 in duplicate donation records, which'd result in $1,272,447.69 COH left over. 
  
  
  Line item loan submissions total only $661,250 loaned instead of the $786,250 claimed on the top-line.
  
  
  $166,549.87 of reported income in donations came from people whose employer is listed as "Best Efforts", which is campaign finance speak for "We tried to figure their employer as best we could but found nothing :(". Some level of incompleteness in employer info is unavoidable, but this is a surprisingly high amount.
  
  
  Reported small-dollar donations (donor gave <$200 total to that candidate during the campaign) total $514,171.61 over two election cycles - and $464,406.27 in 2022. This works out to 15.83% of all total receipts (going off topline numbers). This is very big for a Republican: for comparison, neighboring GOP Congressman-elect Nick LaLota raised $50,696.19 in unitemized contributions, totaling only ~3.31% of all receipts.
  
  
  Given that the hole in data between reported topline expenditures and actual line-item disbursements is that large - close to twice the total cash he claims he loaned to his campaign - I have my strong doubts that most or any of that $786,250 loaned existed, as with his reported 2022 salary.