The only bad thing about this is - Harvey Guillén did a great impression of him and will be missed. Though I guess if he still gets up to public shenanigans, we may see him again!
So when will the Repuglican retaliatory rhetoric vote occur and who will they pick on?
Nikema Williams?!?
WHY!?!
Here’s Williams’ full statement explaining her vote. It’s absolute weaksauce IMHO.
“George Santos is not worthy of serving in the House of Representatives. He will likely be convicted of the crimes of which he was accused. This is the People’s House – and although the House Ethics Committee findings were damning, the people of New York’s Third Congressional District should decide who represents them. I’ll always side on giving power to the voters.”
By this reasoning NO member of Congress should be expelled under ANY conditions since they were all elected by the voters at some point. So why have a House Ethics Committee or a Constitutional mechanism for removing grossly unfit members at all?
ETA: She’s currently trying to defend her stance on Facebook if anyone in her district wants to let her know how you feel. To her credit, she’s actually responding to her critics and even posted her phone number for consituents to speak to her about it personally (but still doing a bad job defending her decision).
that may be the end goal. To not have an ethics committee.
I think you’re onto something…I mean, if SCOTUS can operate that way, why not congress?
Fuck the ruling class.
Meh. Would have been better if they fired him out of a cannon off the capitol grounds.
Expelled, but not evacuated. (Is that even possible for that guy?)
I would normally agree. But Santos literally got elected in large part on the basis of lies told to those people during his campaign, and he stole money from his donors. He was elected through deception. So the people of New York’s Third arguably did not choose Santos to represent them. They chose someone who doesn’t actually exist.
Also, I want everyone to not forget two other groups who are responsible for Santos getting elected in the first place: the media, and the New York Democratic Party. Neither did enough research on this guy before the election. If they had, his opponent could have hammered him into the dirt for those lies. He never should have been elected, and this time, I don’t really blame the voters all that much.
I mean, for me it’s an opinion. It’s not one I agree with, but if, like, 1 or 2 house reps of 435 hold it, that’s not dangerous.
My only caveat to that last is the old adage about a lie traveling halfway around the world while the truth is still getting its boots on.
Yeah, but the New York Democratic Party had done some initial opposition research on Santos and uncovered some of the lies. Doing more research was going to cost money, and their candidate, Robert Zimmerman, didn’t want to spend it. He wanted to focus more on get out the vote efforts. It was a mistake. A big mistake. Zimmerman is also in his late 60s and would have been a first time Congressman had he won. I don’t think an old, rich, white man was the right choice against a young, charismatic, gay Hispanic Republican. And then they refused to use the negative intel they had on him. The media had the info as well, and refused to run the story. There was a lot of people just not doing their job in that election.
The other five being for what, breaking a dueling covenant?
Three for fighting for the south, and then two democrats mostly on corruption charges post conviction.
Santa in stilettos!
close enough
more to the point, the expansion of human enslavement into the west; the reason behind the confederacy.
really, in the civil war, everyone was fighting for the south.
I meant they took literally took up arms and fought against the union, or joined the legislative branch of the other country. These were not expulsions based on their voting record, they were actual cases of sedition and treason that got wiped away by Andrew Johnson.