Fiction could be riveting, as the various lies that supported Consultant George Santos’s political profession have demonstrated. However info may also be entertaining too—a degree made by the Home Ethics Committee’s investigation into the New York Republican, launched at this time.
The report is filled with language that, even within the formal tone of congressional paperwork, is scorching. Right here’s the brief model: “Consultant Santos’ conduct warrants public condemnation, is beneath the dignity of the workplace, and has introduced extreme discredit upon the Home.” Moreover, “Consultant George Santos can’t be trusted.”
And right here’s a longer model, too exact and slicing to cite partly:
Santos sought to fraudulently exploit each facet of his Home candidacy for his personal private monetary revenue. He blatantly stole from his marketing campaign. He deceived donors into offering what they thought had been contributions to his marketing campaign however had been in reality funds for his private profit. He reported fictitious loans to his political committees to induce donors and occasion committees to make additional contributions to his marketing campaign—after which diverted extra marketing campaign cash to himself as purported “repayments” of these fictitious loans. He used his connections to excessive worth donors and different political campaigns to acquire extra funds for himself by means of fraudulent or in any other case questionable enterprise dealings. And he sustained all of this by means of a relentless sequence of lies to his constituents, donors, and employees about his background and expertise.
And that is all along with the already well-known fabrications on his résumé. The 56-page investigative report goes on and on like this, not stinting on particulars similar to Santos’s use of marketing campaign funds on OnlyFans and Botox. The entire thing is fastidiously footnoted with textual content messages and credit-card functions, and specified by charts with every thing however circles and arrows and a paragraph on the again of every one explaining what each is.
The one factor lacking is testimony from Santos himself. The subcommittee famous that although Santos pledged publicly and privately to cooperate absolutely, “that was one other lie.” What he did provide “included materials misstatements that additional superior falsehoods he made throughout his 2022 marketing campaign.” The members thought of issuing him a subpoena however determined in opposition to, reasoning that it will take too lengthy, his legal professional had already stated that his consumer would take the Fifth, and past that—they add drily—“Consultant Santos’ testimony would have low evidentiary worth given his admitted observe of embellishment.”
Whew. Santos responded to the report’s cautious findings by taking full accountability and agreeing to no in fact he didn’t, come on. In a prolonged publish on X, he known as the report a “smear” and stated, “If there was a single ounce of ETHICS within the ‘Ethics committee’, they might haven’t launched this biased report.” He stated that the investigation into him proved that the nation wants a constitutional conference. Santos wrote that he was dismayed to see such vitriol in “the hallowed halls of public service,” and no matter else you possibly can say concerning the man, he has sufficient of a way of camp that we are able to assume this was delivered with a hearty dose of self-aware irony.
However Santos did say that he wouldn’t run for reelection in 2024. This promise, like most of his, is just not well worth the pixels it’s printed on, but it surely’s additionally a formality; Santos could possibly be expelled from the Home as quickly as this month, and he stood almost zero probability of successful a reelection bid. He additionally faces a 23-count federal indictment in New York, and the Home Ethics Committee voted to refer their report back to the Justice Division, so he could possibly be dealing with extra costs sooner or later.
“Public service life was by no means a purpose or a dream, however I stepped as much as the event once I felt my nation wanted it most,” Santos wrote. What want was he filling for the nation? Comedian reduction? As I’ve written, the Santos story is each humorous and appalling: “For those who’re unable to snicker at these tales, you need to examine your pulse. However when you’re solely laughing at them, you need to examine your head.” Just like the antics of an excellent jester, his act places an uncomfortable mirror as much as the viewers—on this case, each the opposite members of Congress and the American folks.
Santos is just probably the most excessive model of a brand new strategy by American politicians to coping with scandal, displaying the disappearance of disgrace from public life. At one time, a scandal-ridden politician would resign in shame and quietly depart the scene. Even President Richard Nixon, not one to shrink from a combat, resigned and slunk again to San Clemente. Later, politicians realized that they might apologize, maybe with tears of their eyes, however obstinately keep in workplace—an strategy popularized by President Invoice Clinton and emulated by Senator David Vitter and Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina.
However looking back, that appears like merely a transition part to the brand new part, during which an embattled politician doesn’t apologize, doesn’t resign, and actually insists he’s a righteous martyr. The epitome of this strategy is former President Donald Trump, who faces 91 felony counts for, amongst different issues, making an attempt to steal an election and absconding with extremely categorised materials after which allegedly mendacity to the federal government, repeatedly, when requested to return it. Quite than again down, Trump is working for president once more on a marketing campaign of non-public immunity from penalties and political retribution, and tells supporters, “They’re not after me, they’re after you … I’m simply standing in the way in which!”
Others have adopted the Trump mannequin, like Senator Robert Menendez. The New Jersey Democrat, who was discovered to have piles of gold bars and stacks of money hidden in jacket pockets in his closet, insists that his prosecution for corruption is all only a scheme to get him as a result of he’s a robust Hispanic legislator.
After which there’s Santos. It’s hilarious to think about {that a} bipartisan group of Home members, backed by reams of proof, are persecuting him for causes darkly hinted at however by no means detailed. Nobody believes that, not even Santos. However nobody has to imagine it. In contrast to Santos’s different lies, he’s not telling this one as a result of he thinks anybody will fall for it. He’s merely refusing to simply accept any form of accountability.
Disgrace had a goal. It saved some dangerous actors from public life, and it chased different ones from public life. With its decline, folks like Santos will blithely cost into workplace and make a mockery of consultant democracy. Our bodies just like the Home Ethics Committee can combat valiant rearguard actions like this one, however they will’t and don’t serve a lot preventative operate.
This can be the top of George Santos’s time as a member of the Home, however Santos shall be again. Maybe it is going to be as a contestant on Dancing With the Stars, or some lower-tier actuality competitors. Perhaps he’ll attempt to reinvent himself as a conservative radio host, or as an Instagram influencer. Or he may attempt a political conversion narrative, positioning himself as a reformed man and a political progressive. The substance doesn’t actually matter. The purpose is that hucksters like him are all the time going to be making an attempt for his or her subsequent act. So Santos received’t go away—and neither will the conduct he exemplifies, as long as disgrace is absent from politics.
