House Expels George Santos From Congress in Historic Vote

“To hell with this place,” he said after his colleagues ousted him.

Nice, and people wonder why he was, only the 6th member in history, expelled
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/12/01/nyregion/george-santos-expulsion-vote

 

Santos is facing federal indictment on 23 counts of wire fraud, identity theft.and other campaign finance charges.

112 Republicans — more than half of the conference — voted to keep the scoundrel - consistent with their devotion to their other notorious liar, a Loser with 91 felony counts against him.

So much for the "law and order" party that defends goons attacking outnumbered police.

 

The Republican Party started losing their honor when they ceased putting country before party, back in Newt's time as Speaker.

They threw away what honor they had left when they nominated Trump to lead them. He's no more conservative than Pol Pot. That most Republicans continue to heed the vile creature in the orange makeup and elaborate combover, and to support another obvious villain in Santos, is the culmination of a slow death for what used to be a respectable political organization.

I'm not claiming sainthood for the Democratic Party, but by comparison, they do look like the well behaved kids in the class these last several years.

 

Kicked him out for being charged and then they’ll probably vote for a convicted felon next year

 

The rabid authoritarianism and white christian nationalism portends the demise of either the GOP or of our democratic republic.

 

Except this is actually a big improvement from the last 8 years. Take a look at those impeachment votes recently. This is closer to a bipartisan vote on any legal or ethical issue in a long time..

 

So since Republicans were willing to take the "moral high ground" on this, will Democrats be willing to do the same, the next time a Democrat House member is implicated in a scandal?

It should be pointed out that this ended up costing Republicans a seat.

I hear some Republicans saying that the Republicans in Congress were naive for doing this, and that their ethical act is likely to go unappreciated by the majority of Democrats -- to stand on principles when the other side doesn't have them.

 

I think it's "a given" that, under similar circumstances but party reversed, Democrats would expel such a member, but "as likely" they wouldn't seat him/her in the first place. I hope the Governor sends a Republican replacement, fair is fair. If the people of NY want to be stupid then ... buy the ticket take the ride.

 

Unlikely.
Also, NY state law might require a special election to be held to replace the representative.
A Republican candidate is unlikely to win in that district again.
Santos probably had a slight edge and managed to win because he was Hispanic and picked up some extra Hispanic votes.

That claim is ridiculous and you know it.

Representatives are elected in specific districts, not states. Are you claiming people knew about Santos's alleged corruption before he was elected?

 

Kudos to those Republicans who voted to expel. A rare display of morality & courage. I wonder how many will pay a price at the hands of their rabid base.

 

After Santos, do you blame them?

Santos won, because he sold NY'rs a load of bullshit.

I posted it so no, I don't know it.

I know how "Representatives are elected", I don't know what district Santos is from but I assume that people that live in it ARE New Yorker's. I'm claiming they didn't do their home work; so ... no.

 

Santos' district is the 3rd congressional district in NY, the wealthiest district in NY, and the 4th wealthiest district in the US. Long Island, Nassau county and part of Queens.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York's_3rd_congressional_district#:~:text=New York's 3rd congressional district is a congressional district for,expelled on December 1, 2023.



It shows that being wealthy doesn't mean making good decisions at the ballot box.

 

No its not,, if you are comparing this to the GOP standard of what a scandal looks like. This was not Hillary and Benghazi or Hunter Biden or Bowman pulling a fire alarm. Look at the scope of this Santos scandal. If you find someone with over twenty federal charges, I should hope we'd ditch them.

 

105 Republicans voted to kick him out, and 112 voted against doing so.

The majority didn't want to lose a Trumpy vote.

The others feared his presence would threaten their re-election.

 

The last sentence I don't quite believe. Most voters would never have cared enough about this guy to blame their Congressman for his presence and punish him. . This is the majority party and if they stick together they keep that majority just a little stronger. They have the votes to prevent a floor vote from ever taking place. Enough of these Republicans simply insisted on voting with Dems to force this to the floor, give the others some credit here that no more than just two pubs voting ''present'. They all took a risk of alienating Trumpsters and the House leadership by casting that 'Yeah' because they thought his behavior was too egregious to ignore. House leadership did not whip the vote, because that view was strongly held by enough of those 105 that they weren't going to win no matter how hard they whipped it.

 

Good to see Republicans joining in this effort. I hope the Democrats will do the same if or when the situation arises with one of their own.

 

Any relation to Bob Menendez?

 

He's next once the ethics investigation rules. He sure seems like a corrupt POS......

 

I don't think so.

 

If you are of the opinion that moderate constituencies would not hold a Republican representative's refusal to eject the embarrassment against him, I doubt it.

A Democratic opponent running ads showing the Republican declaring "I stood with George Santos (aka Anthony Devolder, Kitara Ravache, etc.)" is not an auspicious prospect.

 

These Republicans wouldn't caught making that statement and they wouldn't be voting 'No' to any resolution against expelling him. They will be denying a minority the extra votes to force the issue to a floor vote with a petition to discharge it. If a unified Republican caucus wanted this buried or tabled, it would be buried or tabled, but enough of them did not want it buried. And yes I am of the opinion local voters won't care about George Santos when they have other more pressing matters to worry about.

 

You are entitled to your opinion.

The stark divide among Republicans in Congress on the expulsion of Santos is just one more example of their inability to unify.

It'll be interesting to see how Johnson stands up during the government funding frenzy.

 

That's not the unification I am thinking of. Republicans and Democrats unified on an ethics issue and found common cause to the tune of a Supermajority. That's to be celebrated not sneered at. Its called bi-partisanship and its for the best possible purpose.

 

I recognize that representatives can vote similarly for diverse reasons.

112 Republicans voted to allow Santos to remain as a colleague. 105 demurred.

 

I recognise your hyperpartisan spin at the expense of bipartisan ethics discipline of House members.

105 did not 'demurr' because there was no vote to 'allow' him to remain . The motion on the table was to concur with the recommendation of the House Ethics committee and to expel him from the House over legal and ethical matters, reducing their own majority by one vote in direct opposition to the stated recommendation of House/Caucus leaders of their own Republican party. 112 Republican demurred from the supermajority in the House and voted against the motion to expel and two others voted present.

What is your next effort to minimize the significance of the 6th successful expulsion vote of a US House member?