House of Representatives

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      George Santos: Democrats move to expel indicted Republican from Congress

      by

      Democrats moved on Tuesday to expel George Santos from Congress.The New York Republican won election in November last year but his résumé has been shown to be largely made up and his campaign finances and past behaviour, some allegedly criminal, have been scrutinised in tremendous detail.Last week, federal prosecutors indicted Santos on multiple counts of wire fraud, money laundering, theft of public funds and lying to Congress. Appearing in court on Long Island, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be the victim of a political witch hunt.Now, House Democrats have triggered a political manoeuvre designed to force Republicans to either break with Santos or publicly vote to defend him.To succeed, a privileged resolution introduced by Robert Garcia, a California Democrat, must attract two-thirds support in the House. The resolution could come to a vote within two days.On Tuesday, Garcia told reporters: “The Republicans in the House are actually going to have to go on record and make a decision about if they’re actually going to stand for truth and accountability, or if they’re going to stand with someone that’s clearly a liar.”Some Republicans have said Santos should quit but as yet party leaders have not broken with him, saying he has a right to seek acquittal while representing his district.Republicans control the House by just five seats – and Democrats would be favoured to win Santos’s seat should it fall vacant. In January, amid a far-right rebellion, Santos supported Kevin McCarthy through 15 votes for speaker.Garcia also said Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the Democratic minority leader, was “involved” in the process.McCarthy told reporters he would talk to Jeffries about referring the resolution to the House ethics committee, which he hoped would “move rapidly” despite rarely doing so or imposing heavy punishments.Only five members of the House have ever been expelled. Three were kicked out for fighting for the Confederacy in the civil war. Two were expelled after being convicted of crimes.The last, James Traficant of Ohio, was expelled in 2002. Like Santos, Traficant cut a somewhat picaresque path through the halls of power.Reporting his death in 2014, the New York Times said Traficant was known for his “colorful personality and wardrobe, his legislative theatrics and his wild mop of hair.“So it was something of a surprise when the hair turned out to be fake, a fact that was made clear when he had to remove his toupée during booking after his arrest on bribery and racketeering charges.”Traficant did not let his expulsion stop him running for re-election, as an independent and from federal custody in Pennsylvania. Though unsuccessful, he received more than 28,000 votes.Santos has announced a run for re-election. McCarthy has said he does not support such a move.On Tuesday, Garcia told MSNBC McCarthy had “lost all control of his caucus. He needs Santos for key votes on the on the deficit, on the budget, and so … he’s been working with literally a liar and a huge fraudster in the Congress.“So now McCarthy’s going to actually have to make a choice, if he will support George Santos … or if he’s actually going to listen to the American people.“And so we’re gonna continue to push this as best possible. We think it’s absolutely the right approach. And we’ve given plenty of time to George Santos to resign. We’ve been calling for his resignation for months and for months. It’s time for him to do the right thing.” More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Suspect named in baseball bat attack at Democratic congressman’s office

      by

      Police in Virginia on Monday named the suspect in a violent attack in which two staffers for a Democratic congressman were assaulted with a baseball bat, requiring hospital treatment.Xuan Kha Tran Pham, 49, was arrested after the attack at Gerry Connolly’s office in Fairfax. Connolly told CNN one staff member was hit in the head while the other, an intern on her first day in the job, was hit on the side.Connolly said the attacker, a constituent, caused widespread damage to the office, including shattering glass and breaking computers.“The thought that someone would take advantage of my staff’s accessibility to commit an act of violence is unconscionable and devastating,” Connolly said in a statement.He told CNN the suspected attacker “was filled with out of control rage”.A police spokesperson, Sgt Lisa Gardner, said police were called at about 10.50am. Connolly was not at the office, Gardner said, adding that some staff members hid during the attack.Acts of political extremism, including ones targeting lawmakers, have become increasingly common in the US.Last October, Paul Pelosi, husband of the former Democratic House speaker Nancy Pelosi, was attacked in his home in San Francisco by a man armed with a hammer.Afterwards, the Michigan representative Debbie Dingell predicted “somebody is going to die”.Speaking to Axios, Dingell said that two years previously, after the now fired Fox News host Tucker Carlson broadcast a segment about her, she “had men outside my home with assault weapons that night”.The Democratic governor of Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer, was the target of a rightwing kidnap plot foiled by law enforcement.Justice Samuel Alito, meanwhile, has complained of an increase in threats to members of the supreme court. Last year, a man was charged with attempting to kill Brett Kavanaugh, like Alito a member of the 6-3 conservative majority.Connolly, 73, has represented the 11th congressional district in Virginia since 2009. A prominent Democratic voice in Congress, he frequently spars with Republicans who control the House.Connolly last week criticised CNN’s decision to host Donald Trump for a town hall in New Hampshire, telling Fox News that the event was a “travesty”.“Why would you put a liar and a convicted criminal on a town hall?” Connolly asked during his appearance on the network. “And why would you give him that privilege? … To me, it is frankly reprehensible.”Trump is not a convicted criminal. Last week, in a civil case in New York, he was found liable for sexual assault and defamation against the writer E Jean Carroll.On Monday, Connolly thanked police and emergency medical professionals. The person who attacked his office was taken into custody, he said, adding that his focus was on ensuring his staff members were “receiving the care they need”.“I have the best team in Congress,” Connolly said. “My district office staff make themselves available to constituents and members of the public every day.”Mark Warner, one of two Democratic senators from Virginia, said: “Intimidation and violence – especially against public servants – has no place in our society. This is an extraordinarily disturbing development, and my thoughts are with the staff members who were injured.”Jason Miyares, the Republican attorney general of Virginia, wished Connolly’s staff members well and said: “Political violence is always unacceptable. The coward who did this should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”But Dan Goldman, a Democratic congressman from New York, linked the attack to remarks about political violence by Republicans.“This is horrifying,” Goldman wrote. “From ‘very fine people on both sides’” – which Donald Trump said about violence at a far-right march in Virginia in 2017 – “to calling January 6 a ‘peaceful protest’, there are serious consequences when elected officials refuse to condemn or outright glorify political violence.” More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      A House Republican wants to prove Biden is compromised – but where’s the evidence?

      by

      “This is a very serious investigation,” James Comer, chairman of the US House of Representatives’ oversight committee, told the rightwing channel Newsmax recently. “The allegations and the things that we’re investigating make Watergate look like jaywalking.”The Watergate scandal needed a whistleblower, John Dean, to bring down President Richard Nixon half a century ago. Republican Comer claims that he, too, has a “highly credible” whistleblower who will provide evidence that Joe Biden has been compromised by a foreign power.Such a monumental allegation from such a senior politician would once have been front page news. Even if Republicans were assumed to have partisan motivations, many observers would have begun with the premise that there is no smoke without fire.However, Republicans’ embrace of former president Donald Trump and his bogus conspiracy theories has turned the default response in Washington to one of skepticism. With the identity of the whistleblower still shrouded in mystery, the burden of proof falls on Comer – and he is yet to deliver.Maria Cardona, a Democratic strategist, said: “We should always take the whistleblowers seriously but this committee, at least so far, is cheapening the use of whistleblowers because they keep saying that they have found all this evidence for a whistleblower, and I think they even mentioned they might have more, but where is it?”Comer has previously been rebuked by Democratic colleagues for exaggerating the number of whistleblowers that his investigation has. He took his latest claim to national television earlier this month.Appearing on Hannity on the rightwing Fox News network, he said a whistleblower had provided Congress information raising concerns that, during Biden’s vice- presidency under Barack Obama between 2009 and 2017, he was allegedly engaged in a bribery scheme with a foreign national.He said: “Senator [Chuck] Grassley and I have reviewed this whistleblower disclosure. We find it very credible. We have a lot of questions about whether the FBI even looked into this.”In a fundraising email to supporters, the House oversight committee chairman added: “It is with a heavy heart that I fear our Commander-in-Chief may be compromised by foreign actors, and I’m going to do everything in my power to deliver the whole truth to the American people.”In a letter that used the word “alleged” three times in the opening paragraph, Comer issued a subpoena to FBI director Christopher Wray for a document that, according to the whistleblower, “describes an alleged criminal scheme” involving Biden and a foreign national “relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions” when Biden was vice-president and includes “a precise description” about it.But the FBI this week declined to provide the document. Christopher Dunham, acting assistant director for the FBI’s office of congressional affairs, wrote in a letter to Comer: “The mere existence of such a document would establish little beyond the fact that a confidential human source provided information and the FBI recorded it.“Indeed, the FBI regularly receives information from sources with significant potential biases, motivations, and knowledge, including drug traffickers, members of organized crime, or even terrorists.”Comer has also said he obtained thousands of pages of financial records showing that at least nine members of the Biden family – including the president’s son, Hunter, and brother, James – allegedly exploited the Biden name in their business dealings by accepting money from foreign nationals in China and Romania.The oversight committee chairman followed up with an eagerly hyped press conference this week, stating in an interim report that some Biden family members, associates and their companies received more than $10m from foreign entities between 2015 and 2017.Hunter, a lawyer, received more than $1m from a company controlled by Romanian businessman Gabriel Popoviciu, who was the subject of a criminal investigation and prosecution for corruption in Romania.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBut the financial records showed no evidence that Biden himself acted improperly or took any official action because of his family’s business affairs. Nor, despite the claims of “influence peddling”, did they demonstrate actual wrongdoing by the Biden family. The press conference was widely ignored or panned.David Brock, president of Facts First USA, a non-profit watchdog, said afterwards: “The reality is we don’t even have a scandal here, much less Watergate.”Humiliatingly, Comer was even given a rough ride on Fox News. Host Steve Doocy told the Kentucky congressman: “You don’t actually have any facts to that point. You’ve got some circumstantial evidence. And the other thing is, of all those names, the one person who didn’t profit is that – there’s no evidence that Joe Biden did anything illegally.”Republicans are under pressure to deliver after winning the House majority last year and promising to use their subpoena power to investigate foreign entities that did business with the Biden family, with a specific focus on Hunter.The effort coincides with an imminent decision by federal prosecutors over whether to charge Hunter with tax crimes and lying about his drug use when he bought a handgun.Although Hunter never held a position in the White House, his membership on the board of a Ukrainian energy company and his efforts to strike deals in China have raised questions about whether he traded on his father’s public service, including reported references in his emails to the “big guy”. There are no indications that the federal investigation involves the president in any way.The White House has dismissed his investigation as “yet another political stunt”. Spokesperson Ian Sams said: “Congressman Comer has a history of playing fast and loose with the facts and spreading baseless innuendo while refusing to conduct his so-called ‘investigations’ with legitimacy.”Kyle Herrig, executive director of the Congressional Integrity Project, a watchdog monitoring the Republican investigations, suggests that Comer is abusing the term whistleblower.“If they have a whistleblower that’s what he the public would be interested in but, other than them talking about it, I haven’t seen anything materialise from that,” he said.Comer’s office did not respond to a request for comment or further details. More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Lies, Charges and Questions Remaining in the George Santos Scandal

      by

      Representative George Santos of New York was indicted this week by federal prosecutors on 13 felony counts largely tied to financial fraud. Almost immediately after his election in November, The New York Times began scrutinizing his background. Mr. Santos has misled, exaggerated to or lied to voters about much of his life, including his education; […] More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      George Santos signs deal to avoid prosecution over stolen checks in Brazil

      by

      A day after New York representative George Santos pleaded not guilty to charges in the US, he signed an agreement Thursday with public prosecutors in Brazil to avoid prosecution for forging two stolen checks in 2008.“What would have been the start of a case was ended today,” Santos’ lawyer in Brazil, Jonymar Vasconcelos, told the Associated Press in a text message. “As such, my client is no longer the subject of any case in Brazil.”Asked about the details of the non-prosecution agreement, Vasconcelos demurred, citing the fact the case proceeded under seal. The public prosecutors’ office of Rio de Janeiro state also declined to comment.Court records in Brazil, first uncovered by the New York Times, show Santos was the subject of a criminal charge for using two stolen checks to buy items at a shop in the city of Niteroi, including a pair of sneakers that he gifted to a friend. At the time, Santos would have been 19. The purchase totaled 2,144 Brazilian reais, then equal to about $1,350, according to the charge prosecutors filed in 2011.That followed an investigation opened in 2008 and Santos’ signed confession, in which he admitted to having stolen the checkbook of his mother’s former employer from her purse and making purchases, including in the store, and recognizing the fraudulent checks as those he had signed, according to the court documents reviewed by the AP.A judge accepted the charges against Santos in 2011, but subsequent subpoenas for him to appear personally or present a written defense went unanswered and, with authorities repeatedly unable to determine his whereabouts, the case was suspended in 2013. That changed after he won a US congressional seat and the subsequent flurry of media attention focused on his dubious credentials. Rio state prosecutors then petitioned to reopen the case.According to the terms of the non-prosecution agreement, Santos will pay 24,000 reais (about $5,000), with the majority going to the shopkeeper who received the bad checks and the remainder to charities, newspaper Folha de S.Paulo reported, without saying how it obtained the information. Santos attended the meeting virtually, the paper reported.Resolution of the case removes the possibility Santos might have been obliged to travel to another country to resolve pending charges; that could have been been complicated after he was forced to surrender his passport after recent charges in the US.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOn Wednesday in New York, Santos pleaded not guilty to charges he stole from his campaign and lied to Congress about being a millionaire, while collecting unemployment benefits he didn’t deserve. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      A ‘Rude and Inaccurate’ Trump at the CNN Town Hall

      by

      More from our inbox:George Santos and Republican Profiles in Cowardice‘Anxious Nation’: A 14-Year-Old Cast Member Speaks OutInformal ConnectionsReporters at St. Anselm College in Manchester, N.H., watched the live CNN town hall in a separate room at the event on Wednesday.Joseph Prezioso/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesTo the Editor:Re “Trump Repeats False Election Claims at CNN Event” (news article, May 11):Thank you for your thorough and factual reporting on Wednesday’s CNN town hall with former President Donald Trump. You summarized each of the mischaracterizations, exaggerations and untruths spoken by Mr. Trump in your Fact Check and related articles.Unfortunately, it’s likely that many right-leaning voters drawn to watch the town hall will not be inclined to read them. Likewise, the studio audience for the show, evidently chosen to represent Trump supporters, won’t realize or doesn’t care about the damage his rude and inaccurate statements do to the body politic of our country.CNN made a grievous mistake following through with its plan to air the program after the verdict in the E. Jean Carroll case was announced on Tuesday.Mr. Trump benefited greatly from the undiscriminating and constant coverage of his untruths in the 2016 election. It’s time for responsible print and television journalists to pull the plug and refuse to provide a platform for Mr. Trump’s lies and vulgarity.Jim LinsellTraverse City, Mich.To the Editor:I think it was appropriate for CNN to invite Donald Trump to appear at its town hall. The former president, after all, is the leading candidate for the presidential nomination of one of our two major political parties.I don’t subscribe to the philosophy held by some of the louder voices in the media that “I may disagree with what you say, but I’ll defend to the death my right to prevent you from saying it.”If there was a problem with Wednesday night’s broadcast it was the format. Specifically, making the host, Kaitlan Collins, function as both the facilitator of the event’s question-and-answer framework and the fact checker for Mr. Trump’s responses. Being effective in one of those roles is challenging enough; doing both is impossible.John E. StaffordRye, N.Y.To the Editor:Re “The MAGA King, Back in Prime Time” (Opinion, May 10):Michelle Cottle, in her defense of CNN’s decision to air a town hall with Donald Trump, doesn’t mention an important point.The problem is not just that the network is giving a platform to a man who tried to overthrow our democratic process. CNN is also giving him more airtime than his challengers, which is what got us into this mess in the first place.From the moment Donald Trump descended the escalator to announce his candidacy in 2015, the cable networks gave him unprecedented free coverage — cementing his status as a serious candidate in a way no other presidential hopeful had ever been treated.The election is more than a year away, and already Mr. Trump is manipulating the media, pitting Fox against CNN and grabbing an hour’s worth of prime time.To Ms. Cottle’s most important question: No, we have learned nothing.Betty J. CotterShannock, R.I.George Santos and Republican Profiles in CowardiceRepresentative George Santos, leaving federal court in Central Islip, N.Y., after his arraignment on Wednesday.Johnny Milano for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Santos Is Indicted as Inquiry Claims 3 Finance Schemes” (front page, May 11):It was satisfying to read of George Santos being charged, especially after enduring months of his smug defiance. Mr. Santos doesn’t represent New York’s Third District; he represents the worst type of person — one who lies to get ahead, one who preys upon the less fortunate, one who cheats the system.That such a fraud should help decide the laws of our nation is appalling. Mr. Santos doesn’t serve his constituents; he serves himself. And in his refusal to admit to his alleged fraud, he serves as the epitome of political cowardice.Not surprisingly, House Republican leaders have shown their own political cowardice in winking at Mr. Santos’s bad behavior, even as he’s taken to task for it, in an effort to maintain their tight majority.I applaud House Republicans who have called for Mr. Santos’s resignation and encourage more to follow suit. In “Profiles in Courage,” John F. Kennedy wrote, “Not all Senators would agree — but few would deny that the desire to be re-elected exercises a strong brake on independent courage.”Would that more members of Congress could depress the accelerator.Gary J. WhiteheadNorwood, N.J.To the Editor:Re “Santos Pushed Campaign Money Abuse Past the Usual Line,” by David Firestone (Opinion, May 11):Mr. Firestone writes that George Santos’s alleged scheme to funnel money to himself through a 501(c)(4) organization was “spectacularly dumb.” In fact, it was brilliant and would have succeeded if he hadn’t made the mistake of actually getting elected to Congress.Frauds are discovered because the victim eventually figures out what is going on. In the case of misappropriated election contributions, contributors virtually never check whether the contributions actually went to the campaign, and indeed they didn’t here. If he had not been elected, The New York Times would have never checked his assertions, contributors would not have complained and prosecutors would have never investigated.If Mr. Santos had lost, as he may have intended, he could have walked away with the money.James FogelBronxThe writer is a former chief of the Frauds Bureau of the Manhattan district attorney’s office and a former judge of the New York City Criminal Court.‘Anxious Nation’: A 14-Year-Old Cast Member Speaks OutKameron Johnson as seen in the documentary “Anxious Nation.”Anxious Nation/Area 23a/Lasega FilmsTo the Editor:Re “Anxious Nation” (movie review, May 5):I’m a 14-year-old cast member of “Anxious Nation.” This film is much more than talking to “a handful of struggling teenagers and some of their parents.” Over four years, we made a brave decision to share our struggles with mental health to help others who are struggling too.I found your use of the word “tantrums” especially upsetting. The raw videos you see are real panic attacks. Not “tantrums.” Panic attacks that kids as young as 3 are having.I know this. That is me. Parents don’t realize or understand it.The courage displayed throughout the film is extraordinary and deserves to be acknowledged. It’ll give families a tool to learn from. It’ll give kids my age someone to relate to, and that’s so dear to my heart. I didn’t have that growing up.You are entitled to your opinion of “Anxious Nation,” but to steer away families who really need this film feels wrong and irresponsible.Families need this. My generation is in a crisis.Seveann MortonCardiff, Calif.Informal ConnectionsThe Brookdale Park dog owners have become real friends beyond the park, going to dinner, movies and comedy shows together.Bryan Anselm for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “They Know Your Face, Maybe Not Your Name” (The New Old Age, Science Times, April 25):I worked for a company I loved for 13 years, and the last year I was there, I stopped every morning at a Dunkin’ Donuts on the way to the office. On my final day of work, I went there as usual and told them of the occasion.As the Dunkin’ staff all wished me well, I was on the verge of tears (and simultaneously laughing about crying) as I carried the coffee to my car. It made me truly appreciate the importance of those informal connections we encounter as part of our daily lives.Amy S. RichOrange, Conn. More

    • 75 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      What Comes Next for George Santos?

      by

      The fraud and money laundering charges unsealed on Wednesday do not immediately restrict Mr. Santos from serving in Congress, but the consequences in the months ahead could be severe.The day after Representative George Santos was charged with wire fraud and money laundering as part of a 13-count federal indictment, he was free to go back to work as a freshman Republican congressman from Long Island. Mr. Santos, who pleaded not guilty, can still vote in the House, and he can still raise money to run for re-election.In other words, there were few tangible, immediate consequences for Mr. Santos as a result of his indictment.But that could change in the weeks to come.Will George Santos be removed from Congress?Being indicted does not, on its own, lead to removal from office. Several House Republicans have called for him to step down, but party leadership has made it clear that they will let the judicial process play out. And the slim Republican majority means they need his vote.A resolution to expel Mr. Santos from Congress would need two thirds of House members to vote for it in order to pass, meaning Republicans would have to join Democrats.If he is convicted of any of the charges, whether at trial or through a plea, his role would be severely circumscribed under House rules, and he would likely be compelled to resign. (He would also likely face federal prison time: the top count carries a 20-year maximum term.) But federal criminal cases can take a long time, and such an outcome for Mr. Santos is likely at least months away.What can he do in the meantime?Not very much. On Capitol Hill, Mr. Santos was already something of a pariah even before his indictment. He withdrew from his committees months ago, after the depth of his deceptions became known. He has generally been held at arm’s length, even by his Republican peers.One thing he can do is run for re-election, which he has said he still plans to do. But on Wednesday, Ed Cox, the chairman of the state G.O.P., said that local Republicans would likely force him out through the primary. “He’s out, no matter how you do it, because we have a good party in Nassau County,” Mr. Cox said in an interview.What is next for the criminal case?Federal prosecutors on Wednesday indicated that their investigation was ongoing: The U.S. attorney’s office in Brooklyn is working alongside the Department of Justice’s public integrity section in Washington, the F.B.I., the Nassau County District Attorney’s Office, and the criminal investigation arm of the Internal Revenue Service.The grand jury that voted to charge Mr. Santos will continue to meet and hear witness testimony. Prosecutors could bring additional charges against him, and even charge other people, since there are still a lot of unanswered questions about his background and the financing of his 2022 campaign.Mr. Santos is due back in federal court on June 30 for a hearing on the case, where it is possible prosecutors will reveal more about the evidence they have gathered so far, and whether they anticipate adding new charges.It is clear, from the charging documents, that they had access to bank records and several witnesses, including donors and a former associate.Anything else?With Mr. Santos, it seems there is always something else. On Thursday, Brazilian law enforcement authorities are holding a hearing on a check fraud case against Mr. Santos, stemming from a 2008 incident in which he was accused of stealing a checkbook from a man his mother, a nurse, had cared for.The criminal case in Brazil was first disclosed in a New York Times investigation that uncovered broad discrepancies in his résumé and questions about his financial dealings. That investigation also helped lead to the charges against Mr. Santos this week.Mr. Santos also faces a House Ethics Committee investigation, which started in March, into his campaign finance expenditures, business practices, and other matters.Nicholas Fandos More

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      New York congressman George Santos charged by federal prosecutors

      by

      Federal prosecutors in New York have charged congressman George Santos, the embattled House Republican who has been under scrutiny for months by the justice department over questions surrounding his 2022 campaign and finance activities, according to people familiar with the matter.The exact nature of the indictment – earlier reported by CNN – is unclear because it remains under seal.Santos is expected to turn himself in to authorities at the federal court in Brooklyn as soon as Wednesday morning, one of the people said. There, he will likely make an initial appearance at an arraignment, where the specific charges against him are expected to be released.The news of the indictment appears to have come as a surprise to Santos, who was informed about the charges on Tuesday hours before they were widely reported, and neither a spokesperson in his congressional office nor his attorney responded to a request for comment.For months, the US attorney’s office for the eastern district of New York and the FBI have been pursuing several lines of inquiry over Santos’s federal campaign filings as part of a criminal investigation into whether he unlawfully used funds for non-election-related purposes.The irregularities in Santos’s filings, reported by news outlets, were apparent on their face: 1,200 payments of $199.99 – two cents below the threshold where receipts would be required – an unregistered fund that raised vast sums for Santos, and around $40,000 for air travel.When Santos and his campaign eventually amended the campaign finance disclosures, as they did 36 times, some donors complained in interviews that they misrepresented how much they gave, while some contributions later disappeared entirely from the record.The irregularities also included bizarre payments, such as $11,000 to a company called Cleaner 123 ostensibly for “apartment rental for staff” for a house on Long Island that neighbors told the New York Times in interviews that Santos had been living in himself.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSantos has so far managed to evade any serious political repercussions for his extensive dishonesty to voters, probably due to the fact that Republicans hold a razor-thin majority in the House and Santos was a key vote for House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy to win the speakership.The most pressing issue until the indictment was confined to a House ethics investigation, by a congressional committee that rarely disciplines House members. After the charges were widely reported, McCarthy told reporters he would ask Santos, who last month announced his 2024 re-election campaign, to resign if found guilty. More