461 Comments

The Santos story (or fairytale) gets weirder and weirder with each passing day. This guy got elected on a bed of lies, and it’s obvious that he’s been a shyster for a long time.

So what will the GOP leadership do?

Absolutely nothing.

Expand full comment

Santos is beyond mysterious and bizarre. Where did his $$$ come from? Hints of Russia for a small portion but really a 'musical chairs' type explanation. When $$$ source is revealed I think that is when the music stops and everyone races for a chair and the ca ca hits the fan. Time frame unknowable.

Expand full comment

Don't they have to elect a Speaker before any business can be done? When does Santos expect to be sworn in? I read somewhere just now that Brazilian law is after him.

Expand full comment

Until the Speaker is elected, the House will be run by the Clerk of the House of Representatives, the Honorable Cheryl L. Johnson - https://clerk.house.gov/About#OverviewContact The members-elect are not sworn in until the Speaker is chosen.

Expand full comment

Note this is yet another first for black women!

Expand full comment

In Michigan the newly elected member of the Michigan Supreme Court was sworn in Sunday by Governor Gretchen Whitmer. She is a black woman whose husband took two months of family leave to care for their new born daughter. She is the granddaughter of a man lynched many years ago for asking for a receipt from a store in the South. Justice is moving and the pace seems to be quickening. Hallelujah and Amen.

Expand full comment

Maybe the Republicans have done the best thing by accident again :-)

Expand full comment

They rarely do the right thing on purpose.

Expand full comment

Susan, I was thinking along similar lines this week, watching the circus set up. It's going to be interesting to see if the House extremists manage to demand their way right out of having any influence at all. It seems to be leaning that way. So, I wonder who will end up being speaker? Why do some people think it might be Santos? At this rate, he may end up not in the House at all. I think McCarthy is on the slide out. Even if he manages to pull something off, he will owe so many conflicting interests that not much is likely to get done. And it's a good setup for Dems to reclaim house in 24.

Expand full comment

So Cathy what happens if Santos is tossed. A few years ago our neighboring state, Nevada, purposefully elected a dead man to their state legislature in order to claim the seat for the Republican Party. Said party then appointed a Republican candidate to fill the so called vacancy.

Expand full comment

A special election is held to fill the vacancy.

According to the Constitution Article I, Section 2, clause 4:

"When vacancies happen in the Representation from

any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall

issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies."

Expand full comment

And Cheryl Johnson is not just a “clerk” or a black woman but is highly educated (law student from Howard Univ) but effectively handled the Smithsonian’s recent acquisition of the African American Museum. She is in charge of the House while these schmucks are infighting. The House is in good hands.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the excellent civics lesson Cathy. I was not aware of the Clerk of the House position, and was wondering what was going to happen if the Republicans could not choose a Speaker in a timely fashion. I was also unaware that new members could not be seated until a speaker is chosen. If that is the case, do the old members continue to vote? Looks like the Honorable Cheryl L. Johnson (who has a pretty impressive bio, I might add) will be a pivotal figure in the coming days or weeks, even.

Expand full comment

Yes Thanks Cathy! I learn something important every time you comment!

Expand full comment

I believe that newly-elected members can vote. If they can’t, McCarthy can never get 218 votes, and at least some Republicans would have demanded that Santos resign. And if now-former members could vote, Hakeem Jeffries would become Speaker today.

Expand full comment

I wonder if McCarthy even knew about “clerks”

Expand full comment

Keystone Kev is laser focused on becoming Speaker. I doubt if he knows rules of the House. I doubt that he knows much of anything except how to count to the number he needs to become Speaker. He is an embarrassment. I am trying to get ready for the dumpster fire that is coming in the House. I am trying out a new single malt, so that may be in play from time to time.

Expand full comment

It was discussed last night on MSNBC. I usually have it running in the background and I happened to catch that before I hopped into bed last night.

Expand full comment

'Kevin McCarthy Fails Math for First Time Since High School'

January 3, 2023

'WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a historic setback, Representative Kevin McCarthy has failed a math test for the first time since high school.'

'Witnesses in Congress said that the California lawmaker sat ashen-faced as it appeared that, once again, he was no match for arithmetic.' (Satire, NewYorker)

Expand full comment

If the members-elect are not sworn in until after a speaker is chosen then how does the GQP have a majority to vote on who will be speaker?

Expand full comment

According to the government document: House Practice: A Guide to the Rules Chapter 33 Oaths p. 631:

"Until a Member-elect has subscribed to the oath, he does not enjoy

all the rights and prerogatives of a Member of Congress. Deschler Ch 2

Sec. 2.1. Members who have not taken the oath are not entitled to vote

or to introduce bills. Manual Sec. 300; 8 Cannon Sec. 3122. However,

unsworn Members have participated at the beginning of a session in

organizational business, such as the election of the Speaker."

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPRACTICE-108/html/GPO-HPRACTICE-108-34.htm

Expand full comment

No 118th House Biz until a Majority Leader is elected. This means no seating of any newly elected Reps such as serial Santos. Brazil & the US have a mutual extradition Treaty circa 1960's. Lula in charge in Brazil where criminal proceedings may go forward in abstentia.

Expand full comment

Maybe those Reps who took part or supported 6 Jan. ,can be un-elected too. It's worth s try.

Expand full comment

That would be justice, of course. But NEVER going to happen. But Santos? If he is allowed in Congress, that is truly appalling.

Expand full comment

If he is, it's a travesty, and will make this Congress the laughing-stock of the world.

Expand full comment

It would fit in perfectly with the rest of the crazies! All the Republicans want is another stop Biden vote! Kinda like all those guys from Indiana!

Expand full comment

Praying for the 14th Amendment Section 3 to be used for any that had sworn an oath to support and defend the Constitution prior to January 6. Remove them (TFG included) and put someone else in their place.

Expand full comment

Yes! The 14th Amendment covers their bad behavior regarding insurrection so they much be removed in order to fulfill their oath to the Constitution!

Expand full comment

Sounds very reasonable to me, but it's a bit late for today.

Expand full comment

How do you think the present DOJ would react to a request for Santos’ extradition? Hint: I bet he wouldn’t get bail there, and as far as I know, they don’t have a speedy-trial provision in the constitution.

Expand full comment

No trial necessary in Brazil as Santos admitted years ago to a 'misunderstanding' although I would want to know the exact word(s) Santos spoke in Portuguese to try to cover his Fraud. Fraud was the Brazillian charge. There is a mutual US - Brazil Extradition Treaty. Update: On the case stats in Brazil , the Rio de Janeiro Prosecutor's spokeswoman is Maristella ... .

Expand full comment

Gosh! What do they have to abstain from? (Sorry... :)

Expand full comment

Just means the criminal adjudication in Brazil can go forward without the physical presence of the wayward defendant. I understand Santos does have counsel in the US communicating with the Brazilian authorities. Apparently, the Brazilians have old admissions from Santos just like his current scams.

Expand full comment

Oh, dear! you didn't pick up "abstentia" either? I was so sure that you would, or I wouldn't have been so crass. (Red face emoji).

Expand full comment

I believe that means Brazil can proceed with prosecuting Santos even if he is not physically present in Brazil -- in absentia - absent.

Expand full comment

Thanks, Cathy - that's what I understood it to mean. My little "smile" symbol wasn't big or yellow enough. I scratched around for a smiley, but it refused to be copied.

Expand full comment

Brazil is interested in him for an alleged fraud from 2008 but until this blew up they didn't know where he was. Now they know big-time. https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/02/politics/george-santos-brazil-fraud-case/index.html

Expand full comment

How can they have not known where he was? A google search will probably turn up my dog let alone an actual physical address. I don't think they were looking very hard because Bolsanaro was in charge.

Expand full comment

Here's a clue: George Santos is an optometrist on Martha's Vineyard. It's not an uncommon name, and apparently he's used other names as well. I'm easy to find online because my name is unusual. When I'm fact-checking a manuscript, I *love* unusual names. (Just had to track down a John Allen who was in Congress ca. 1800. Knowing he was in Congress helped. If I had to find a contemporary John Allen without knowing much about him, it would be hard.)

Btw, the Santos case is from 2008. Bolsonaro didn't take office till 2019.

Expand full comment

Lula back in charge now.

Expand full comment

thanks for the info.

Expand full comment

Has the issue of where he was born ever been made clear? Something I read earlier suggested Brazil. This makes me sound like Trump (ugh) but a serious question. Everything else he has said is a lie.

Expand full comment

Not that I've seen. I'm not sure his citizenship has been established either. A born-in-Brazil naturalized citizen could serve in Congress. A non-citizen most definitely could not.

Expand full comment

Maybe they will extradite him.

Expand full comment

As someone pointed out, Santos has begun his tenure with one more lie. He posted a self-congratulatory message on his website about being sworn in. Then took it down when it was publicly pointed out that NO ONE has been sworn in because there's no Speaker of the House.

Expand full comment

And some viewers bought it ... even The Hill platform mindlessly repeated the Con. Today's House session started with a warning to the behavior of newly elected members who have NOT been sworn in ... I have to go back & listen again. UPDATE: Meanwhile, the 7th vote was 19 for Donalds, 1 for Trump (Gaetz after running in from a Fox news interview to make his vote for tfg), and 1 "present". No Kevin.

Expand full comment

I know people are crowing about that, but OTOH it's not impossible that his webmaster posted the page in the reasonable (at the time) expectation that he would be sworn in shortly and then took it down when the clown show got under way. It's *possible* that Santos is doing his own web work, but I wouldn't assume that.

Expand full comment

I would not assume that either, but I do believe Santos has a computer platform in his Space Coast condominium to communicate with Brazillian contacts & other Floridian & NY District marks.

Expand full comment

Aha. 2+2.

Expand full comment

Yes! It may take a while!

Expand full comment

Santos is no more "bizarre" than Trump.

The Santos difference is his last name and his skin color. He is of Hispanic, not Anglo descent and his skin is dark, not white. For those two reasons, he may be in a bit of trouble with Republican Americans (but maybe not) who will NOT view him as worth supporting like they did with Trump who also lied with every breath.

If Santos was Anglo, there would not even be any news stories about him. Just a normal Republican lying at every breath like Trump.

Expand full comment

Interesting that descendants of Southern Italians are OK, but not Hispanics. When Friedrich Drumpf decided to leave Bavaria and try the New World, thousands of Italians from the Veneto were doing likewise, but they went to Brazil instead of America - mainly to work in the coffee plantations. Among them numerous members of the Bolzonaro family - in Veneto dialect the "z" sounds like "s", so that's how they were registered. That makes him technically Italian, not Hispanic. Now, in Italy the northerners have a poor opinion of the "gente della Bassa" (anywhere south of Naples), which includes anyone whose name begins "De" and ends in "s". But time and politics heal all wounds, and the ex-President of Brazil and the hopeful-President of the USA may fall on each other's necks like brothers. We'll soon see.

Expand full comment

Good comment! Interesting linguistic detail.

Expand full comment
Jan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023

Yeah Mike. That is the way it goes. I am so proud to be made up of among other blood some of Hispanic origin. I think it hardens my edge. Let’s face it some blades dull far too soon. When you think about chance and DNA and a grandfather of long ago being found drifting off the coast of South Carolina as a 3 year old clinging alone amidst the bodies and wreckage of a Spanish galleon taken by pirates and left adrift one concludes just how breathtakingly lucky one has become as that tenuous strand is your lifeline. Throw in some scotch and some Irish whiskey along side the tequila and I would be willing to bet that is only a beginning. We are one. Although people demean others we are the humans. Demeanors come in last place in the human race.

Expand full comment

The Republicans also got rid of Cawthorne, Mike

Expand full comment

This is absurd.

Expand full comment

I'm with you on the money and I can't wait to find out! I vote that it's from the Russians. They behave like Putin did when he gave trump the once over and got his number, then all he had to do was praise him to get the concessions he wanted (they're in the translator's notes that were torn up). Santos is not someone one would call smart...plus he's got some kind of mental disorder. Where else can the Russians find a better candidate to vote for their interests, such as deny funding to the Ukraine?

Expand full comment

I would think that the constituents who voted Santos in would want to recall him in a special election? We’re not hearing anything from people in his district.

Expand full comment

He will probably be noted in some History books and time will tell where the $$$s came from. Russia is a good guess! However, we don't really know who all is behind tfg! I wonder why he had a bank account in China? So many questions and so few answers!

Expand full comment

Santos has one vote. Is that why the repubs who support McCarthy, and McCarthy, are looking the other way? This is typical repub strategy.

Expand full comment

There's that, but there's also the fact that the GOP's House majority is pretty slim, and the caucus is fractured, to put it mildly. Also fractious, come to think of it. If Santos resigns or is expelled, I think there's a pretty good chance that a Democrat will win the special election to replace him. (Everyone who voted for Santos ought to be doing penance, or community service, or something.)

Expand full comment

That's exactly why the GOP doesn't want Santos to be expelled. And BTW if it was a Democrat who lied about his background and had charges pending in Brazil, you can bet the Repubs would clammering for his removal!!

Expand full comment

So would other Democrats.

Expand full comment

Oh please GOD please!!

Stamps go up with month, I'd better order a bunch. If a writing campaign happens, I am so on it!!!!

Expand full comment

That's thinking ahead! :-)

Expand full comment

I'm real good with organization in the first week of January. After that.......

Expand full comment
Jan 5, 2023·edited Jan 5, 2023

They already have - I just searched at usps.com. 1st class Forever stamps 60 cents. Postcard Forever stamp now 44 cents.

Expand full comment

I believe fist class is going to 63 cents near the mid month.

Expand full comment
Jan 8, 2023·edited Jan 8, 2023

Thanks. Checked and verified. Apparently, I was at least one postage increase behind!

From USPS website: "Today, the United States Postal Service filed notice with the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC) of price changes to take effect Jan. 22, 2023. The new rates include a three-cent increase in the price of a First-Class Mail Forever stamp from 60 cents to 63 cents." https://about.usps.com/newsroom/national-releases/2022/1007-usps-announces-new-prices-for-2023.htm

Expand full comment
Jan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023

Herb,

I am also puzzled by the Santos story but in a different way.

I think the Santos story is BIG because he is of Latin descent, has a Hispanic last name and his skin is dark. He has the wrong last name and the wrong skin color.

Americans don't care about the lying. They care that Santos is not a white Anglo.

In 2016 a serial liar, philanderer, rapist, wife beater and well known, long time crook named Donald Trump ran for President. The vast majority of what he said on any given day was a lie.

Republican Americans coaelesced around him and spent four years either licking his shoes or rolled over on their backs as he continued to lie every day. Most days, those behaivors looked like full support for Trump.

George W. Bush also told huge lies: Remember weapons of mass destruction? Nothing happened to him and Americans died for that lie.

Daddy Bush I also lied. Remember Willie Horton? That was a huge lie.

Reagan lied constantly as well and I will enumerate two of them: 1) There was a black woman in Chicago with 15 addressesses collecting 15 welfare checks and 2) "I did not sell weapons to Iran the then send the money to a bloodthirsty dictatorship in Latin America".

So, since most Republicans lie constantly and have since Ronald Reagan, I think the Santos story is "big" NOT because he also lied.

Again, I think the Santos story is BIG because he is of Latin descent, has a Hispanic last name and his skin is dark. He has the wrong last name and the wrong skin color.

Americans don't care about the lying. They care that Santos is not a white Anglo.

Expand full comment

Republicans lie, patriotic citizens die.

Democrats lie, impeachment results.

"I did not have sex with that woman"

"Depends on what the definition of is is"

Expand full comment
Jan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023

Bill Clinton's serial philandering, including forcing himself on a young girl in the OVAL OFFICE, and the fact that Democrats did not convict him in his Impeachment trial was the platform that Republicans used to acquit Trump for lying and being nasty dude.

Clinton's serial phliandering and Hillary's support for that cost her the White House.

WORSE, if Bill Clinton had managed to keep his pants on in the Oval Office Al Gore would have won and there would never have been 20 years of shoot em up in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Bill Clinton was just one rolling disaster. Now we find out he was in routine attendance with Jeffrey Epstein.

Bill Clinton was just a low life liar as well.

Expand full comment

At least he knew how to run a government.

Expand full comment
Jan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023

Yup, and a very talented straight-laced liar. I wouldn't want to be sitting across a poker table from Bill.

I voted for him twice because he was way better than the GOP (or third party) alternatives.

Expand full comment
Jan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023

She never said he forced himself on her…EVER.

Last time I looked, philandering is not against the law.

A good share of powerful men can’t keep it in their pants.

Just another reason in a list of many to put more women into office. We take care of business‼️

Expand full comment

Women flirt and start stuff also. But I agree that he didn't force himself on her. It would have been a whole another ballgame !

Expand full comment

Monica has stated she was in love with him, she did what she did willingly. While I would wish every president had a sterling character, IMO, what Bush did, sending our military off to fight unjust wars and millions of people either killed or displaced, much more egregious.

Expand full comment

No, I don't believe there was any force exerted on his or her part. Both of them knew what they wanted from their relationship from the start. Bill underestimated Monica. And, no matter how many times Bill swore to people ("I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky"), he still got caught by the infamous blue dress. Bill approached his friend Vernon Jordan (who was on the Revlon board of directors) to get Monica a job as an administrative assistant at Revlon. Later, when I read that, I laughed out loud. Did Bill really believe Monica would settle for being an admin. asst. at Revlon in New York? I thought, "Buddy, Monica's got a lot bigger plans than that." Monica made some $$$ on the whole escapade (e.g., paid TV interviews, product ensorsements, a book, et al). I've wondered a few times in the past years if Monica and Bill were still "dating."

Expand full comment

I think Linda Tripp showed Monica 'which way to go' ?

Expand full comment

I agree with you that every lowlife who participates or turns a blind eye to sexual abuse of minors should be jailed for the rest of their lives. New revelations about Clinton visiting Epstein’s perverted world should probably land him in jail. But by that reasoning, Trump should also go to jail for whatever he got out of his much longer and more open association with Epstein, don’t you think? And if we follow your logic, Matt Gaetz and Jim Jordan should also be in jail for their openly discussed but for some reason ignored proclivities, shouldn’t they? Also the rumors about McCathy’s sexual activities should be brought out in the open and investigated. Do you think that every Republican Congresswoman who allegedly participated in these alleged activities should be booted out of office? Should McCarthy? And, if they turn out to be false, the people propagating that set of lies need to be found and prosecuted for slander and defamation, yes? Why trot out old news, if,if, if, when your complaining conveniently focuses blame on Democrats and distracts from currently on-going potentially illegal behavior that demonstrates bad judgement, moral depravity and lack of self-control in the Republican ranks? Long ago, while Clinton was campaigning for his first term as President, I happened to meet a lovely older woman who had worked for the State Department for many years. She was appalled that Clinton was running, and probably going to win. She told me that his “inability to keep it in his pants “ was well known and made him a security risk. Clearly Trump is much more of an ongoing security risk, than Clinton. Please let’s talk about current events, here.

Expand full comment

Meredith,

As I have already said here ad nauseum: Rich whte men in America do not go to jail.

Period.

Expand full comment

Madoff and Epstein did end up in prison. Maybe because they were Jewish?

Expand full comment

Unfortunately, very true!!

Hope AND Pray 2023 is Better!!!

🙂🙃

Expand full comment

And Meredith - thats what the REqubs are saying right now - talk about "current" events!!!

Lets face it Clinton is & was a really great bullshitter who knew how government worked.

Trump was not & did not!!! Hopefully some day he also will not be "current events".

Expand full comment

Yeah but the “current events” the Repubs want to talk about is one of Biden’s kid’s computer. I am far more interested in what’s on Trump’s kids’ computers. And Ginnie Thomas’ computers. Oh well.

Expand full comment

You should listen to the Linda Tripp tapes. They still exist. Monica Lewinsky was literally besotted with Clinton and perceived herself as wife number 2 ala Libby Dole. Lewinsky stalked the president. Staff repeatedly tried to reasign the intern, who, by the way was in her 20s. Not a kid. That famous photograph of her along a fence happened because she got to the event 3 hours early and positioned herself front and center.

Expand full comment

Didn't know all that !

Expand full comment

I don't think he forced himself on her. I'm sure she would have said so. That being said, I wish he had been able to control himself. He was one of the best presidents - period !

Expand full comment

Well said. I voted for Bill C. twice, but his endless skirt-chasing and lying did cost the dem. party the WH (as you wrote) which subsequently put the U.S. in more useless wars, draining the U.S. Treasury and putting the blood of so many soldiers and civilians on U.S. hands. And the beat goes on....

Trump(s), Clinton(s), and Jeffrey Epstein represent the three sides of a power triangle ruling the U.S., a demoralizing triad who fule the nation's [and often the world's] present and future. Why can't we get honest, upfront people to run the U.S. government?

With all the factors weighing people down these days, I find a touch of political humor to be very good medicine. This moment in the trump-hillary "debates" is very therapeutic. I give thanks to the Dane(?) who made this gift for us all. Genius. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8Wde1fFvPg

Expand full comment

Ha ! Ha ! F.A.S. !

Expand full comment

Last time I checked, is still alive.

Expand full comment

Possibly, but I think Zeeshan Aleem of MSNBC has a better take on it: Republicans in particular are uneasy with Santos's lying in a way that they aren't with the lies and distortions that are endemic on the right because Trump et al.'s lies pander to the Republican base while Santos's lies are entirely about himself.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/george-santos-lies-republicans-rcna63730

Mike S, your Reagan and Bush 1 & 2 examples would seem to support Aleem's thesis. However, you might want to take another look at your claim that "Americans don't care about the lying. They care that Santos is not a white Anglo." (1) "Americans" is a huge and diverse group. Are you really talking about *all* Americans? Could we maybe have some evidence, or at least a coherent argument? (2) I'm 71 years old, I've been paying attention to politics since I was in my mid-teens, and I haven't seen anything like this. That's one reason I'm paying attention to this story. Another reason is that I want to know why this didn't become national news till after the election.

Expand full comment

Totally disagree Mike...Santos belongs to the pathological liars club, period!

Expand full comment

I don't know where I saw it, I think perhaps on "Beau of the Fifth Column" youtube but I could be mistaken, but wherever it was the line was "the Republicans don't care that he lied, they care that he got caught"

Happy New Year, Mike S. I've scrolled down and seen a couple of your comments and you are hot out of the gates this year, as one of the other commenters frequently notes; "sizzling". Indeed!

Expand full comment

See the Zeeshan Aleem link I posted just above. He suggests that the difference between Santos and the other mendacious Republicans is the kind of lies they tell: most Republicans lie to whip up and/or please their base, but Santos's lies were all about himself. I'm inclined to agree.

Expand full comment
Jan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023

I wouldn't go that far about his race- he looks White enough. Supremacists will use a monkey if it does what it's told.

Expand full comment

Mike, I never even gave his heritage a thought. You are right about the bipartisan lies that have been spread through the years by both sides. Santos' victory was also the result of the courts throwing out the redistricting plan that the NY legislature passed. Finally, you have to consider the Hispanic shift to the GOP over the past two election cycles.

In short, they both lie, but the Republicans do a better job of it.

Expand full comment

Again, absurd.

Expand full comment

Republicans supported Herschel Walker, a man with multiple personality disorder and a long record of domestic violence so yeah, they have no standards.

Expand full comment
Jan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023

K With Walker and Santos, the Republicans have standards that reflect Jobba the Hutt and Newt Gingrich. It feels like going from a. Lincoln to a Yugo [voted absolutely worst post-WW II auto.]

Expand full comment

But at least some of them are showing some ambivalence about Santos that they didn't about Walker. Some of that public ambivalence is coming from Republicans on Long Island and around NYC: they *know* this isn't going to play well in their neighborhood.

Expand full comment

He is likely not a US citizen (his claim to have been born in the US is specious as he now admits he was born in Brazil; naturalization papers are public--but require FOIA requests--so the NYT is trying to figure it out), so has now very possibly committed multiple felonies in addition to the usual grift. It'll be super interesting if there's a temporary appointment by the governor in the 3rd District.

Expand full comment

Linda Santos has so many aliases and falsifications that he may be a stateless person. How delightful if it could be established that he is not an American citizen. Then we could ship our Republican trash abroad.

Expand full comment

Or just throw him overboard and be done with it.

Expand full comment

I am very curious about this, and I won't believe anything he says unless he's got papers to prove it.

Expand full comment

Herb Isn’t Santos the Poster Boy of Trumpian ethics? He scores a perfect ten regarding false credentials, phony finances, his ‘Jewish Catholicism,’ and an imaginary entrepreneurial career that echoes Trump. Of course he will be seated. How could the Republicans reject one of their own?

Expand full comment

They must consider him to be a genius.

Expand full comment

David If Trump was a ‘stable genius,’ does this make Santos an ‘unstable genius?’

Expand full comment

No, just a "stable genius of a lesser sort" if we rate genial lying by how it is leveraged to achieve undeserved power. I think Santos may never be seated, but he'll have some funny stories for his grandchildren if he ever has any. A "where is he now?" story in the making.

Expand full comment

Question??? Where were the investigative reporters when this guy Santos was running?Why has all this stuff come out after he was elected? Did I miss something?

Expand full comment

He was in a Jewish district claiming to be Jewish so he passed the main "acceptability" criterion. Nobody asked any other question after the main question was "settled".

Expand full comment

Mike I thought that he was a ‘Jewish Catholic,’ and now find that he is a gay Latino with Trump’s entrepreneurial integrity.

Expand full comment

There was one paper that wrote about his questionable resume & refused to endorse him. The very right wing Long Island Leader. Tiny paper with part time staff. The readership is Fox- friendly so no one wanted to “out” him.

Expand full comment

I say, let them keep doing what they are doing. This will let the fence sitters, see the far right for what they are.

Expand full comment

Why didn't the Democrats know about all this before the election? Or if they did know why didn't they do a loud, Republicanesque campaign about it? It seems they were so sure their candidate would win that, in thier arrogant minds, there was no need to look into or publicize this shyster's background.

Expand full comment

Actually the Democrat opponent did bring some of this up and was called a liar for telling just some of the truth.

Expand full comment

As did a local journal. But it didn't gain traction in the national press. They were too busy watching polling to due the work necessary in following a lead.

Expand full comment

I guess the truth didn't get any traction at the time.

Expand full comment

Well, that works pretty well. Just ask Trump, the master of projection.

Expand full comment

If he were a Republican there would have been a massive press campaign about it. Perhaps he mentioned it and then let it go?

Expand full comment

Barney I’ve asked the same question about Democratic opposition research and the media. I found that a local newspaper last September published some of Santos’s fabrications with no apparent impact. (Santos also was a failed congressional candidate in 2020).

As a former Foreign Service Officer Political Officer and a successful local political candidate for municipal council I am gobsmacked that Santos’s fabrications went unnoticed, even by his Republican supporters.

Clearly Santos is a prime candidate for the House Ethics Committee, unless he is criminally apprehended.

Expand full comment

You mean you think he'll be interrogated by the Ethics Committee? I wish!

More likely he'll be asked to become a member of the committee.

Expand full comment

David Santos qualifies as a member of the degutted House Ethics Committee. As a ‘Jewish Catholic,’ he should seek guidance from the ethics committee of the Vatican and the Haridim.

Expand full comment

Yes, let's blame the Democrats for a Republican fraudster! One more joker in a GOP deck of more than 400. Collect 'em all!

Expand full comment

Richard I acknowledge that the Democrats failed to do rigorous opposition research on George Santos’s ‘resume.’ Perhaps, naively, they could not imagine such humongous falsehoods.

When President Biden kept warning that Putin was going to invade sovereign Ukraine, many, including President Zelensky, could not believe that Putin would do something so outrageous.

As P. T. Barnum phrased it “You can fool some of the people all of the time, you can fool all of the people some of the time, BUT you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.”

Trumpublicans and Putin take note!

Expand full comment

His Democratic opponent was lacking here. All that mess should have come out DURING the campaign !

Expand full comment

It did. Please be sure to read the whole story.

Expand full comment

Santos is the latest step in the evolution of the politics of T****. Lies and more lies, bigger and better. If we don’t see prosecution of the men in suits, and soon, this is where we are headed.

Expand full comment
Jan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023

Jack I didn’t think it possible, but George Santos has out-Trumped Trump in falsehoods and venality. I am awaiting Santos’s book THE ART OF THE SCHLEMIEL.

Expand full comment

My nickname for Santos is supertrump. Also, why did it take so long to find out that almost everything he said was a lie? Where were the journalists?

Expand full comment

Completely agree Jack

Expand full comment

Just wait until after Brazil indicts him for theft....

Expand full comment

Exactly. They are spineless and beyond power hungry at all costs.

Expand full comment

90% of them - yes !

Expand full comment

Perhaps because they're all shysters?

Expand full comment

The DOJ needs to indict and arrest Trump, bring him to trial quickly with the documents case, get him into a cell without his cell phone, then methodically throw the book at him.

Then, assuming the sky has not fallen in the meantime, they should begin arresting everyone else who contributed to the events of Jan. 6th. This needs to happen before the GOP has finished wrecking Congress.

Also, if there is a criminal case in Georgia to be made against Trump and his assorted flunkies, now is the time to make it.

This needs to dominate the news cycle, not the travails of pissy little Kevin and associated bratty neofascisti.

Expand full comment

David,

Recommendation: Do Not Hold Your Breath Waiting for Garland.

Expand full comment
Jan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023

Mike, until I'm blue in the face and Hell freezes over, if necessary. Unless proven wrong, I will continue to believe that we are a nation of laws, despite our many past failures in this respect.

How will Garland live with himself if he fails to save our nation? I'm sure he knows what needs to be done. If not, maybe a few million people gathering peacefully on the Mall would help him understand.

Expand full comment

David, I do believe it is time to show our support for the indictment of Trump AND sitting members of Congress who are election deniers, seditionists and insurrectionists. A gathering on the Mall may be in order to support our Justice department and make it crystal clear there are consequences outlined in our Constitution for dealing with traitors and their supporters.

Expand full comment

Yup. Not a protest: but a large showing for a full disclosure and accounting of what happened by DOJ following through on Jan 6 committee recommendations (and anything else they have on the table). I'm ready to go to WaDC, anyway- part of my personal Reclaim America plan. It'd be great to be there with a few hundred thousand other like-minded folks.

Expand full comment

Karen, I think you might be right. This is all so unprecedented that we don't have any point of reference But maybe because of that the kind of solid measured show of citizen --not. sure what the wording would be-- proposal/request/support-- might leave the mountain no choice but movement

Goodness it is a tangled web

Expand full comment

Good morning, David.I almost forget that Merrick Garland was chosen by Obama to be a Supreme Court justice, a position for which he is, both by training and temperament, perfectly suited. Biden gave him the consolation prize of his current job and he accepted, it seems to me, without a whole lot of thought about what might be coming. I just hope he has a bit of an edge that we've seen once or twice and can come out swinging when he needs to.

I also agree with Linda that a piece must be missing. And Garland livers in the shadow of the complete humiliation of Mueller who let himself be forced to speak when the evidence wasn't there

Expand full comment
Jan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023

Nice comment, Dean I think Mueller had plenty of evidence, especially for several charges of obstruction of justice, but he allowed himself to get bushwhacked by Bill (that two-faced bastard!) Barr, and the MSM let it pass so as not to seem biased. I mean heck, the President was their golden goose, and it was too soon to dump on Trump.

I hope Garland and Smith are too savvy to get bushwhacked this time.

Expand full comment

Well, Mueller begged them not to insist on his testifying and he said repeatedly in response to direct questions that, no, he didn't have enough to indict. And I am definitely not remembering his exact words. I did read them but my memory is long gone for that kind of detail. What I do remember clearly is that what they wanted was for Mueller to hand them something they could use in a court of law and he couldn't or wouldn't do it. I completely agree with you about Bill Barr. Reading up on Barr was how I first ran across that word "Dominionist." Very creepy idea. And Barr has a bad history. He was awful until he saw the ship might be sinking and he would be smarter to get off. An opportunist. I nearly couldn't watch his testimony to the Jan 6 committee. I realize they had to use a lot of horrible people but he lied with such ease. Anyway, my reference to Mueller as a comment on Garland is that Garland surely remembers the terrible humiliation they put Mueller through, browbeating him unmercifully. It was a convincing show of just how brutal people can be in that arena. No matter which side they're on. And that's enough about that. Those images of that good, stoic man have stuck with me.

Expand full comment
deletedJan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Liz, I may have missed something, but the infamous OLC memo of 1973(?) was just ... a memo, not a law or a SCOTUS decision. And I understand that an institutionalist and conservative like Mueller was not interested in setting precedents. But if he had clearly said that in any other similar case he would recommend indictment, and that the only reason he felt he couldn't do that was the OLC memo, and had done so before Barr claimed his "right" to characterize and summarize Mueller's report before the press had read and analyzed the original, then we might have dealt with Trump sooner rather than later. Now it's water under the bridge, and Trump is just a private citizen and as subject to prosecution as any other citizen.

But failure of our public servants to see past what they consider to be "precedent" and imagine the dire consequences of their acts in the context of our history is a real problem. Courage is not easy, but there are times when nothing less will suffice.

Expand full comment

"an old man with diminished auditory acuity, a little lost in a cavernous hearing room trying to locate who was speaking . . . and he wasn't into the Dems gotcha theatre."

Liz, I don't know what part you thought was poorly worded, but this description of Robert Mueller nearly brought me to tears. A strong and a fragile man who no one with any sense of decency would have involved in that brutal show. It outraged me then and it still does.

Expand full comment

David, I have thought for several months that there is a hole in the case to make against Trump and the others. I don't think he has a bullet proof case. Maybe the weak link is the FBI, CIA or another larger player. I think what very little they can prove on Trump isn't worth the embarrassment the Democrats would have to withstand.

Expand full comment

The hole is a jury of 12 human beings that will be harangued and lied to by Trump's lawyers for months on end.

By the time Trump's lawyers muddy up the water, make it look like Garland is lying and make Trump look like the victim, there is very likely to be at least ONE juror that votes to acquit.

Expand full comment

So, still, bring it on. Let process proceed. He might get off like OJ, but at least our laws and our justice system will proceed, all the way up our corrupted "supreme court" no doubt. Right now, he is way overdue for an arrest.

Expand full comment

Agree.

Expand full comment

I agree the uniqueness of the Trump Legal Team’s deep feed bag would turn any trial into an endless circus.

The spectacle of January 6, is too large with too many highly placed participants to condense to straight forward prosecution.

I imagine Garland’s brighter bunch is figuring an alternate.

My suspicion is Deus Ex Machina is the only decent end to the fiasco of 45.

Expand full comment

Such as? Suicide? Assassination? A mysterious car crash? Food poisoning? Too many big Macs? Nuclear war? A hurricane with better aim? Another pandemic that only strikes GOP members of Congress? Hey, this is fun imagining all the the things that might happen instead of what desperately needs to happen.

Art, the Deus ex Machina has be be us, through our elected representatives, duly appointed officials, and as determined by law under the Constitution. Anything less will not begin to start solving our many problems.

Expand full comment

😨😱😢

Expand full comment

Sadly, Mike, you have identified the hole.

Expand full comment

So, let's see the hole

Expand full comment

Lynn, I wish we could and just be done with this. The longer this drags on, the more fodder for the GOP.

Expand full comment

I'd say the longer this drags on, the more fodder for Democrats and progressives, if only we knew what to do with fodder.

Expand full comment

That is a maybe. With the current fragmented party a lot of mouths are in full yawn.

Expand full comment

Are there wats to revoke Trump's citizenship? And his gang?

Expand full comment

Susan. I believe citizens born in the USA cannot have their citizenship revoked under any circumstances. They can be imprisoned for life, however, even executed, despite the barbarity of it.

Expand full comment

I agree with you and it should have already happened by now, but I trust Garland, especially now that he's installed Jack Smith in charge, kind of like his guard dog. I foresee trump and cohorts getting indicted at the same time in pre-dawn raids....

Addressing your, "This needs to happen before the GOP has finished wrecking Congress": I have no fear that they are wrecking Congress--they're wrecking their own party! I am presently watching the chaotic vote in the House in utter glee as my prayers are being answered. The GOP is self-imploding in utter humiliation....

Expand full comment

Those Republicans who claim to be aggravated are not aggravated enough. If they were they could build a party to govern instead of wasting time insinuating that government has been weaponized against citizens. Trying to expose TFG's lawlessness, transgressions, and identify those who aided and abetted is what needed to occur.

Expand full comment

When I hear about all the gop that behind the scenes or “off the record” are “aggravated”, and show the backbone of jellyfish; I look at the Cover of Time magazine’s Person of the Year, President Zelensk and think about the daily aggravations the Ukrainian people resist, fight against, and with their lives, reject. The current House gop epitomize a very full volume of a book that could be called “Profiles In Cowardice”

Expand full comment

Stop with the gop, nothing grand about these arses, if there ever was.

Expand full comment

Zelenskyy’s speech was so full of compassion and fire for his people, his country. It was refreshing even though his Ukraine in constantly under siege. The Repubs whining...none of them have been at war but they’ve certainly caused many. May locusts come after all of them.

Expand full comment

... wasting time, and money ...

Expand full comment

It's going to be totally and completely FUBAR - Fouled (not actually that word) Up Beyond All Recognition.

Expand full comment

FUBAR! sounds Germanic. FUBAR ist wunderbar! Do you have SNAFU in American? it's a favourite of mine.

Expand full comment

SNAFU was invented in America. "Situation Normal - All Fouled (not that word) Up." The invention of American GIs in World War II.

Expand full comment

FUBAR started in the US military too, circa 1944. I first heard it in Israel! Good acronyms get around.

Expand full comment

I’m laughing here! Thanks for the morning giggle!

Expand full comment

Oh yeah, it’s the Repub mantra

Expand full comment

It is totally FUBAR! And, it is depressing beyond belief. It is hard to believe that republicans have scarcely a functioning brain cell, but that is today's reality!

I read years ago that the earth shifted on its axis and I noted (facetiously at the time), that the world would probably get a bit crazy. Didn't think too much about it until the trump "error" when insanity took hold, criminals occupied the WH, and their minions continue to walk the halls of congress even after trying to overthrow the US government. Below is the last paragraph to the link https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/05/19/melting-glaciers-shifted-earths-axis/ At this point, it sounds as reasonable as any other explanation of the madness we have been seeing! 😉

"Though imperceptible to humans without the use of specialized instruments, the tremendous mass of the Earth has been shifting more than ever recorded. Since 2005, the rate of polar drift has increased by about four centimeters per year. 'The shift is nothing that a regular person might notice in their day-to-day life,' said Steinberger. 'One would really have to wait for millions of years in order to notice something.' It is, however, a stark reminder of the magnitude of humans’ effects on the planet."

Expand full comment

Don’t blame Mother Earth for the insanity of republican cretins

Expand full comment

Not "blame" but a possible explanation for that which cannot be explained! 😵‍💫

Expand full comment

It's a natural phenomenon. From time to time (centuries or millenia) we have to choose a new North Star. Current one is already off a bit.

Expand full comment

HEY! There are no Republican Cretins. We excommunicated them.

Expand full comment

Remember that pompous twit Stephen Miller? His deposition is page after page of arrogant lecturing.

Expand full comment
Jan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023

My nephews knew of him in HS and his reputation preceded him; ie. he has been arrogant and vile for his entire life! And, at age 30 he gets picked up by the most evil and dangerous person to ever occupy the WH. You just can't make this stuff up.

And, then there is this - according to the March 22, 2022 Vanity Fair article headline:

"TURNS OUT FAMILY-SEPARATION ARCHITECT STEPHEN MILLER IS STILL ON MOMMY AND DADDY’S CELL PHONE PLAN"

"The revelation came out amidst his lawsuit trying to block the January 6 committee from subpoenaing his cell phone records."

Expand full comment

OMG! As you say, you can't make this stuff up! Or, similarly, truth is stranger than fiction.

Expand full comment

As vile a thinker as ever there was.

Expand full comment
Jan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023

The most damaging piece in the LFAA today is the concessions McCarthy is making to get the extreme right votes for his candidacy; especially those regarding challenging a speaker, shutting down the Ethics Office, sending all documents from J6 Committee to House instead of Archives. These three concessessions alone severely weaken the Speaker and who will be chosen, McCarthy, because he will be weak. The calculus is to have a speaker who wants power so bad he can be controlled and be ineffectual to any subset of representatives who have nothing to loose as their goals are to weaken the institutions of a federal government, beginning with the House. Imagine if Manchin and Sinema had a third or fourth Senator to play hardball with Schumer, the power would be held by the four and nothing would have been accomplished. My prediction is that the 118th will be the revenge Congress with nothing substantial coming from the House Republicans legislatively. A series of crisis voting and more investigations drumming everything else out. FUBAR for sure.

Expand full comment

That's the way it's looking. And that person is next in line to the presidency?!!

Expand full comment

Increase security around Mr Biden.

Expand full comment

And VP Harris.

Expand full comment

Clearly included in my comment, though Biden gone sets in motion other precautions. I'm starting to imagine plotlines instead of policies from some sectors of the Conservative Caucus. Time to be vigilant.

Expand full comment

1) To a non-politician, the most remarkable part of this is how difficult it seems to be for centrists of both parties to negotiate a coalition that would truly dominate the House. Were the speaker beholden to that group, instead of the 15 or 20 Republican whack-jobs, the entire country would benefit.

2) With all these investigations the Republicans say they are going to launch, it is also remarkable that they are not going to have a look at the 2020 elections, which they insist were stolen. If you believe that is what happened in 2020, you should be determined to bring it to light and bering the perpetrators to justice. We all know, however, why they will never go there.

Expand full comment

Citizens United Dark money gets Centrist Republicans primaried by radicals begore the general election. Moderate Republicans must avoid appearing bipartisan at all cost

Expand full comment

Could be. But doesn’t the Citizens United dark money know who they (the moderates) are when they run? But I get the point - something is keeping them from reaching across the aisle, and it isn’t the voters.

Expand full comment

Yes, dark money knows the moderates, but until they stick their necks in a bipartisan fashion, they aren’t noticed as a target

Liz Cheney is a perfect example

Expand full comment

Nothing changes when no one is held accountable, and that must start at the top. DOJ: charge Scott Perry.

Expand full comment

Like x 1,000

Expand full comment

“He has agreed to cuts to the Office of Congressional Ethics and to forcing the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol to turn over all of its documents to the Committee on House Administration, rather than the National Archives, which has sparked concerns that Republican members will reveal the identities of national security personnel who testified before the committee.”

I don’t see how it would be legal to turn the original J6 Committee documents over to anyone but the Archives. The Trumpist desire for revenge on people who testified does not need fanning. What an interesting demand of the MAGA bunch! Less surprising is the demand to cut back the Ethics Committee.

Expand full comment

Considering they have NO ethical base…

Expand full comment

Because if it’s a question of ethics or meeting your goal... ethics begone.

Expand full comment

I agree, Carol - How is it possible that one scheming power-hungry person 'has agreed' to ...turn over all of the [House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the US Capitol] documents to the Committee on House Administration, rather than the National Archives??? How is it possible that so many rules and regulations can be, and have been, bent and ignored by people who single-mindedly and exclusively have their own interests in mind, and never the well-being of the country?

Expand full comment
Jan 3, 2023·edited Jan 3, 2023

And for agitators who hollar about waste in government you'd think they would be happy to have 87,000 new hirees at the badly understaffed IRS to bring in revenue that is due. It would pay enormous ROI. Transparency and efficiency are a liability for them. It would help unmask their vapid claims.

Expand full comment

Why cut back on the ethics committee? Why not just come disband it entirely? Doesn’t seem like they’re going to do anything about Santos.

Expand full comment

I've read that the J6 Committee, before their term expired, sent critical materials regarding testimony from national security personnel to the White House and the DOJ in order to protect those who identities were pledged to be protected. I don't understand why the J6 Committee didn't just sent the entire trove of documents to the National Archives before the 118 Congress began. Doesn't mean Republicans won't have access to said documents but at least the selected documents appear to have been protected by sending to the WH & DOJ.

Expand full comment

Scary!!

Expand full comment

Could they be more obvious?

Expand full comment