this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2023
433 points (99.3% liked)

politics

24544 readers
2841 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The embattled congressman isn't running for reelection after the panel found "substantial evidence" of federal crimes

The House Ethics Committee has found “substantial evidence of potential violations of federal criminal law” by indicted New York Congressman George Santos, and are referring the matter to the Justice Department. Santos announced that he will not be running for reelection in 2024 shortly after the committee released its report.

“If there was a single ounce of ETHICS in the ‘Ethics committee’, they would have not released this biased report,” he wrote, adding that he “will … NOT be seeking re-election for a second term in 2024 as my family deserves better than to be under the gun from the press all the time.”

The ISC report found that in multiple instances, Santos moved funds donated to his campaign to his personal checking accounts, and used the money at luxury store Hermès, OnlyFans, Sephora, as well as for meals, parking, and to pay off his credit card bills. His FEC reports included payments for Botox, a luxury vacation in the Hamptons, taxis and hotel stays during his Las Vegas honeymoon, and spa treatments.

all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Maddie@sh.itjust.works 119 points 2 years ago

Guy is doing a Republican presidential candidate speedrun

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 52 points 2 years ago (3 children)

He didn't even go to a competent doctor for the Botox:

“[T]his expense was not reported to the FEC and was noted as ‘Botox’ in expense spreadsheets” turned over to investigators, it continues. The session took place at Mirza Aesthetics, a Manhattan medspa run by a doctor whose license was suspended in 2021 over breast and penile enhancements gone wrong.

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Is penile botox a thing for any reason? Because somehow I picture this guy being obsessed with penis size or his inability to last longer than 3 thrusts or something.

[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 20 points 2 years ago (3 children)

the botox was to remove his penis wrinkles

[–] noride@lemm.ee 18 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I thought he wanted egg smooth balls tbh.

[–] SpeakinTelnet@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago

It was to go with his egg smooth brain.

[–] chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Don't we all?

[–] NovaPrime@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

You didn't let me finish... would you suck THESE balls?

[–] Slinky5737@infosec.pub 13 points 2 years ago

You'd need a lot of botox, given that he is a penis wrinkle.

[–] MorrisonMotel6@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years ago

penis wrinkles = prinkles

[–] Walican132@lemmy.today 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Think it was penile Botox?

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't expect to ever find out.

[–] Qkall@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Biish please, we're on the Internet. You will learn.

"A tiny needle is used to administer the Botox into the penis. The clinical impact is that the patient's erection becomes stronger, harder, and longer lasting"

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah, but I have no idea whether that's one of the places that George Santos got his Botox.

[–] Num10ck@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

the giveaway is that when he smiles his cock doesn't move.

[–] mateomaui@reddthat.com 5 points 2 years ago

Living on the edge, man

[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 46 points 2 years ago (1 children)

House Ethics Committee Chairman Michael Guest will introduce a resolution to expel George Santos from Congress tomorrow morning. So, the vote will probably be after Thanksgiving

[–] books@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Hate to a political hack here but I'm hoping he survives the vote.

It's going to be way easier to defeat him in 2024 than a different Republican... Plus the Republicans should have done this as soon as they found out he was a shit stain not a year before the election.

Edit nm Nyt is reporting he won't run for reelection. Get him the fuck out of Congress.

[–] TimLovesTech@badatbeing.social 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

He stated today he isn't running in '24.

*Didn't see your edit =)

[–] BeautifulMind@lemmy.world 33 points 2 years ago

Now if only every congressman was subject to stringent financial oversight

You know, the kind that treats "not having a bank account" as a red flag

[–] the_q@lemmy.world 27 points 2 years ago (1 children)

These motherfuckers run our country.

[–] brothershamus@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] norbert@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Well, right, they're in power and everything but I'm not sure they're actually capable of running the country. All evidence points to the contrary.

[–] clearedtoland@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Now I’m curious what OF account he felt was worth spending campaign funding for.

[–] RooPappy@kbin.social 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't get the outrage. I'm sure his campaign headquarters was just a little warm and he needed something to create a breeze and cool things off.

A place that only sells fans is where I'd shop as well. Nobody knows fans like a place that is for Only Fans, right?

[–] DarkenLM@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago

I prefer the good ol' Big Ass Fans.

[–] Tronn4@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

Trump look-alikes

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

The public needs to know! For reasons!

[–] snowsuit2654@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago

Yes, I want to know and also as a member of the taxpaying public, I'd like access to the subscription.

[–] ivanafterall@kbin.social 15 points 2 years ago

That's what he looks like after cosmetic surgery?

[–] The_Picard_Maneuver@startrek.website 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This guy is just recklessly impulsive.

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

This guy is fuckin hilarious.

What a joke.

[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

B-b-but Hunter Biden's penis!

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

What else would he have purchased on OnlyFans?

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

Just like us Fr fr 😭😭

/s

[–] blazera@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago

And the department of justice goes "....."

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 2 years ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The House Ethics Committee has found “substantial evidence of potential violations of federal criminal law” by indicted New York Congressman George Santos, and are referring the matter to the Justice Department.

The committee, comprised of six House members equally divided between the two parties, unanimously concluded that Santos “knowingly caused his campaign committee to file false or incomplete reports with the Federal Election Commission; used campaign funds for personal purposes; engaged in fraudulent conduct in connection with RedStone Strategies LLC; and engaged in knowing and willful violations of the Ethics in Government Act as it relates to his Financial Disclosure (FD) Statements filed with the House.”

The ISC report found that in multiple instances, Santos moved funds donated to his campaign to his personal checking accounts, and used the money at luxury store Hermès, OnlyFans, Sephora, as well as for meals, parking, and to pay off his credit card bills.

His FEC reports included payments for Botox, a luxury vacation in the Hamptons, taxis and hotel stays during his Las Vegas honeymoon, and spa treatments.

In October, a superseding indictment added charges related to an identity theft and money-laundering scheme involving his campaign.

The ball is now in their court, but with a slim majority and a history of protecting their own, the House GOP may choose simply to wait out his term.


The original article contains 445 words, the summary contains 223 words. Saved 50%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!