Santos is expelled

[Bob78164]

House Republican leadership voted to keep George Santos in office. Fortunately, in the wake of a damning Ethics Committee report more than 100 Republicans voted to do the right thing. Santos has been expelled from the House. —Bob

[silverscreenselect]

Rep. Max Miller, a GOP freshman from Ohio, accused Rep. George Santos of stealing money from him and his mother, and attacked Speaker Mike Johnson for opposing Santos’ expulsion. “I think leadership — this is just another example of Republicans who can't lead. And that's a really shameful. You know, the speaker and everyone in leadership knows that this man is a crook,” Miller said. He accused Santos of using his and his mother’s credit card information to steal $5,000 from each of them, and marking them as an over donation.

“In January, I got an FEC Complaint because of an over donation to George Santos, and I'll explain why. I’m Jewish, my family's Jewish and they were donors and they like to give money to people who are Jewish, who are Republicans, because that's who we are,” he said. “And Mr. Santos took, not only my credit card personally, he took my mother's credit card personally and he swiped them both for an additional $5,000, marking it as an over donation. And I have it by the FEC, and I have the document in my office. And what I can tell you is within that document — I won't disclose any other names — but he defrauded over 350 people for hundreds of 1000s of dollars under undisclosed amounts, and I had to hire an attorney to fight it by the FEC that I think cost me 15 or $20,000. Altogether, this man has cost my family $30,000.”

My representative, Nikema Williams, was one of only two Democrats who voted not to expel Santos. I'm curious to know her reasoning.

And you can probably add Santos to the growing list of people Donald Trump will pardon if he gets a second term.

[Pastor Fireball]

First representative to be expelled in over 20 years. That dubious honor went to the man with the most obvious hairpiece in political history, my state's own Jim Traficant.

[BackInTex]

My representative, Nikema Williams, was one of only two Democrats who voted not to expel Santos. I'm curious to know her reasoning.

Perhaps she, like others, deem expelling a duly elected peoples representative as a very heavy action to be used as a last resort. Yes, Santos is scum and should not be in Congress, but his constiuents elected him to represent them, and it should be left to them who represents them, aside for things like criminal behavior (which Santos is very likely guilty of, but as of yet he is innocent until proven guilty).

The Democrats on the other hand are fine with convicted crimminals continuing to represent them.

[Ritterskoop]

I was OK with waiting until he is convicted of something.

We will miss the entertainment factor, though.

[Bob78164]

I was OK with waiting until he is convicted of something.

We will miss the entertainment factor, though.

I think the findings of the Ethics Committee are ample basis. Serving in Congress is a privilege. It shouldn’t take the same level of proof as is required to take away someone’s freedom. —Bob

[BackInTex]

I was OK with waiting until he is convicted of something.

We will miss the entertainment factor, though.

I think the findings of the Ethics Committee are ample basis. Serving in Congress is a privilege. It shouldn’t take the same level of proof as is required to take away someone’s freedom. —Bob

Bob, what is your opinion on what Jamaal Bowman did? It is apparent he was attempting to obstruct House proceedings. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool or lying. Or both.

[BackInTex]

I was OK with waiting until he is convicted of something.

We will miss the entertainment factor, though.

I think the findings of the Ethics Committee are ample basis. Serving in Congress is a privilege. It shouldn’t take the same level of proof as is required to take away someone’s freedom. —Bob

Bob, what is your opinion on what Jamaal Bowman did? It is apparent he was attempting to obstruct House proceedings. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool or lying. Or both.

[mrkelley23]

I was OK with waiting until he is convicted of something.

We will miss the entertainment factor, though.

I think the findings of the Ethics Committee are ample basis. Serving in Congress is a privilege. It shouldn’t take the same level of proof as is required to take away someone’s freedom. —Bob

Bob, what is your opinion on what Jamaal Bowman did? It is apparent he was attempting to obstruct House proceedings. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool or lying. Or both.

I'm with Skoop -- I think they should have waited until he was actually convicted of something before expulsion. This is a bad precedent.

But as to your question (and apologies for answering before Bob has a chance to weigh in) being a fool, or being a liar, are not exclusionary, obviously. See islands that tip over if they get too many people on them, Jewish space lasers, Larry Craig, etc.

Rep. Bowman was convicted of a misdemeanor, and he definitely broke some internal rules. If it were me, he would be subject to some kind of discipline, but probably only a fine or reprimand. I think the censure power is already being overused, and I'm afraid the same thing is going to happen with expulsion.

[Bob78164]

I was OK with waiting until he is convicted of something.

We will miss the entertainment factor, though.

I think the findings of the Ethics Committee are ample basis. Serving in Congress is a privilege. It shouldn’t take the same level of proof as is required to take away someone’s freedom. —Bob

Bob, what is your opinion on what Jamaal Bowman did? It is apparent he was attempting to obstruct House proceedings. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool or lying. Or both.

I think the appropriate first step is an investigation by the Ethics Committee. His intent is considerably less obvious to me, in light of his public statements, than was Donny’s intent to incite an insurrection (as found by a trial court after hearing evidence and conducting a full trial on the merits).

Rep. Bowman’s guilty plea establishes that he pulled a fire alarm without reasonable cause. His reason for pulling it, though, remains to be seen. —Bob

[BackInTex]

His intent is considerably less obvious to me, in light of his public statements

What public statements? "It was an accident"? It clearly was intentional.

[Weyoun]

Make up your mind BiT.

Should we wait for obvious felon Santos to be convicted before kicking him out, or should we throw someone out because they pulled a fire alarm?

Oh wait. You only care about their party affiliation, not some sort of larger principal. That’s why you also have no problem with Congress critters showing seditionists around the building so they know what doors to break down.

The Dems to their credit want Hernandez tossed too - but that would risk a Democratic combat for the election, so the Republicans in the Senate don’t want that. They’d rather have another felon around.

[BackInTex]

Make up your mind BiT.

Should we wait for obvious felon Santos to be convicted before kicking him out, or should we throw someone out because they pulled a fire alarm?

Oh wait. You only care about their party affiliation, not some sort of larger principal. That’s why you also have no problem with Congress critters showing seditionists around the building so they know what doors to break down.

The Dems to their credit want Hernandez tossed too - but that would risk a Democratic combat for the election, so the Republicans in the Senate don’t want that. They’d rather have another felon around.

I get it, you don't believe in innocent until proven guilty. That's O.K. Just own it.

Pulling a fire alarm to prevent a congressional vote. It's not "just", but you don't care. You just want to make your childish jabs.

[jarnon]

Pulling a fire alarm to prevent a congressional vote. It's not "just", but you don't care. You just want to make your childish jabs.

Rep. Jamaal Bowman pleads guilty to a misdemeanor for pulling a fire alarm in House office building

Bowman claims he was confused and thought pulling the alarm would somehow help him get through a locked door. He got a fine and probation, typical for that sort of offense. Much less serious than Santos's and Menendez's crimes.

[tlynn78]

Make up your mind BiT.

Should we wait for obvious felon Santos to be convicted before kicking him out, or should we throw someone out because they pulled a fire alarm?

Oh wait. You only care about their party affiliation, not some sort of larger principal. That’s why you also have no problem with Congress critters showing seditionists around the building so they know what doors to break down.

The Dems to their credit want Hernandez tossed too - but that would risk a Democratic combat for the election, so the Republicans in the Senate don’t want that. They’d rather have another felon around.

I get it, you don't believe in innocent until proven guilty. That's O.K. Just own it.

Pulling a fire alarm to prevent a congressional vote. It's not "just", but you don't care. You just want to make your childish jabs.

Not to mention the colossal stupidity - the man's either to stupid to understand the purpose/function of a fire alarm, or he's too stupid to realize his little prank would be caught on camera - not sure I'd want him representing my interests.

[Weyoun]

Make up your mind BiT.

Should we wait for obvious felon Santos to be convicted before kicking him out, or should we throw someone out because they pulled a fire alarm?

Oh wait. You only care about their party affiliation, not some sort of larger principal. That’s why you also have no problem with Congress critters showing seditionists around the building so they know what doors to break down.

The Dems to their credit want Hernandez tossed too - but that would risk a Democratic combat for the election, so the Republicans in the Senate don’t want that. They’d rather have another felon around.

I get it, you don't believe in innocent until proven guilty. That's O.K. Just own it.

Pulling a fire alarm to prevent a congressional vote. It's not "just", but you don't care. You just want to make your childish jabs.

I’m not saying it’s not worthy of censure. In fact, I think it is. It’s just not equivalent to the massive fraud that George Santos maintained.

You only care because you want to suggest the pretense of hypocrisy. As you’ve suggested above, you have zero integrity regarding this, and you only find Santo useful because he is a Republican vote.

The broader point is that we’re at a point in this country where creeps like him get elected. Most people don’t want to run for office due to all the downsides and expenses involved. This guy doesn’t care because he’s a scam artist anyway and he thinks he can fool everyone. Simpletons like you make that happen.

You bitch about draining the swamp, yet he could not be any more of a swamp creature. But you’ve made huge moral compromises already, so what if someone, who is a crook and a thief, and who you would tell privately to other that you think that he lives an immoral lifestyle, gets elected? He’s just another vote for you.

[Bob78164]

Tom Suozzi has decisively won the special election to replace George Santos. The Republican majority has now shrunk by a seat.

This continues the Democratic streak of overperformance in special elections. --Bob

[Pastor Fireball]

Tom Suozzi has decisively won the special election to replace George Santos. The Republican majority has now shrunk by a seat.

This continues the Democratic streak of overperformance in special elections. --Bob

The GOP candidate, a daughter of immigrants, tried to hammer Suozzi on the immigration issue... but the voters hadn't forgotten that the current House GOP is doing jack and shit to pass Lankford's border bill, so the voters told the GOP to get stuffed.

[Bob78164]

Tom Suozzi has decisively won the special election to replace George Santos. The Republican majority has now shrunk by a seat.

This continues the Democratic streak of overperformance in special elections. --Bob

The GOP candidate, a daughter of immigrants, tried to hammer Suozzi on the immigration issue... but the voters hadn't forgotten that the current House GOP is doing jack and shit to pass Lankford's border bill, so the voters told the GOP to get stuffed.

There's more to it than that. Suozzi called for tougher border enforcement. So when Pilip supported the Republicans bailing on the very same border deal they had negotiated, Suozzi was able to hammer her for complaining about the issue while outright opposing solutions. Voters agreed with him. --Bob

[silverscreenselect]

I would note that there were two factors in this election that didn't have anything to do with the issues specifically:

1) At least some people who voted for George Santos after voting for Biden in 2020 may have experienced buyer's remorse.

2) There was a major snowstorm in New York City today that probably depressed election day turnout. There was a week of early voting, which tends to be Democratic, that didn't have to deal with that weather.

But.... a lot of Republicans still thought they were going to hold this seat.

[Bob78164]

I would note that there were two factors in this election that didn't have anything to do with the issues specifically:

1) At least some people who voted for George Santos after voting for Biden in 2020 may have experienced buyer's remorse.

2) There was a major snowstorm in New York City today that probably depressed election day turnout. There was a week of early voting, which tends to be Democratic, that didn't have to deal with that weather.

But.... a lot of Republicans still thought they were going to hold this seat.

In other news, George Santos has declared victory in his re-election campaign and thanked the voters of New Jersey for sending him back to the Knesset. --Bob

[silverscreenselect]

I have an almost 99% Endorsement Success Rate in Primaries, and a very good number in the General Elections, as well, but just watched this very foolish woman, Mazi Melesa Pilip, running in a race where she didn’t endorse me and tried to ‘straddle the fence,’ when she would have easily WON if she understood anything about MODERN DAY politics in America.

So good of Trump to supply Flock with his talking points for today. Republicans lost this race because their candidate (1) was a very foolish woman who (2) didn't endorse Trump. I'm surprised he didn't add that she was an immigrant from a shithole nation who served in the military with other suckers and losers.

[earendel]

I would note that there were two factors in this election that didn't have anything to do with the issues specifically:

1) At least some people who voted for George Santos after voting for Biden in 2020 may have experienced buyer's remorse.

2) There was a major snowstorm in New York City today that probably depressed election day turnout. There was a week of early voting, which tends to be Democratic, that didn't have to deal with that weather.

But.... a lot of Republicans still thought they were going to hold this seat.

The snowstorm was a Democratic plot to depress voter turnout and allow fraudulent early voting to give the victory to the Democrat.

[flockofseagulls104]

I would note that there were two factors in this election that didn't have anything to do with the issues specifically:

1) At least some people who voted for George Santos after voting for Biden in 2020 may have experienced buyer's remorse.

2) There was a major snowstorm in New York City today that probably depressed election day turnout. There was a week of early voting, which tends to be Democratic, that didn't have to deal with that weather.

But.... a lot of Republicans still thought they were going to hold this seat.

The snowstorm was a Democratic plot to depress voter turnout and allow fraudulent early voting to give the victory to the Democrat.

Your partisan panties are showing, ear.

[earendel]

I would note that there were two factors in this election that didn't have anything to do with the issues specifically:

1) At least some people who voted for George Santos after voting for Biden in 2020 may have experienced buyer's remorse.

2) There was a major snowstorm in New York City today that probably depressed election day turnout. There was a week of early voting, which tends to be Democratic, that didn't have to deal with that weather.

But.... a lot of Republicans still thought they were going to hold this seat.

The snowstorm was a Democratic plot to depress voter turnout and allow fraudulent early voting to give the victory to the Democrat.

Your partisan panties are showing, ear.

I give up. I guess I don't have a good sense of comedy timing.