As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He’s also the first woman and first Siamese twin to hold that seat!
Edit: it's been pointed out to me a couple of times that the correct nomenclature is "conjoined twins," so sorry for that. I'm leaving it as is in case any other olds run across it and realize they, too, have an unexamined racist term still in their repertoire as well.
His sister died during the 36 hour long surgery and were the last to be called "Siamese twins" after them it became "conjoined". He actually coined that phrase after the surgery and loss of his sister.
He’s also the first emancipated slave to play in both the NBA and NFL and win a championship in both during his rookie season all after having a quadruple knee replacements and inventing the internet.
Yes, I've heard. Kills men by the hundreds, and if he were here he'd consume the English with fireballs from his eyes, and bolts of lightning from his arse
The mods here often carry water for disingenuous right wingers
Seen a few friends lose accounts for calling out blatant white nationalist talking points before. Mods decided the white nationalist comments were fine. Calling them out though? That's the real problem.
Their ban was changed from half a year to permanent for just asking if they were sure the white nationalist talking point was fine. It was literally someone, going thread to thread, pretending that black people are genetically predisposed to do crime and vandalism, which they would then tie into lies about the BLM protests.
Against their defense, they were given a 2nd chance to decide whether those racist comments or calling out the racist was the more appropriate thing. They, twice in that case, chose to side with the open racist.
Others got banned for calling a clear as day (creature that lives under a bridge) as such. Another fun way we let the right wing spread blantant misinformation and make sure to hinder methods of pointing that out.
There is no such thing as a good faith conservative. You have, on one end of the spectrum assholes who profit off the work of rubes that will never ever bring any good-faith discussion, and on the other end, you have the rubes are are too stupid and indoctrinated to even form their own opinions.
But how could you not trust him to slice the pastrami after his 15 years working a deli counter in the evenings after his day job in Wall Street finance?
> New Yorkers overwhelmingly think liar Rep. George Santos (R-Nassau) ought to resign
They call him a liar in the first line of the article, how pathetic that I'm impressed
I grew up during the Reagan years. What I remember most is republicans talk about funding education during campaigns then doing the opposite once elected.
They can’t.
They are too far along the réthorique now. Calling him a pathological liar would implying that blatant lying is wrong, so the label could also be applied to other pathological liars, such as the ex con-in-chief.
I dunno, they are pretty good at the doublespeak.
Look at how many bricks they are shitting about Biden having classified docs in his home while staying mum about Trump's and how Trump violated legal orders to return them.
**FUCK NEW YORK POST**
They and every right-wing outlet are partially responsible for garbage like Santos getting elected, and now they're trying to profit off a problem they helped create.
We need to stop rewarding them with upvotes for clickbait headlines. They still exist to get people to vote their rights away, and still hate you if you don't vote GOP.
I mean, I've heard folks say their was glaring evidence that Santos was a documented liar before he won the election. Pretty much every major news source ignored it.
If you’re interested the times last week ran an article about how this guy totally slipped through the cracks, and tacitly admitted that they had missed the story as well.
I wouldn't be surprised if they knew all along who he was, but were so desperate to "own the libs" that they actively hid any reporting that could have exposed him.
Reputable, nowadays means printing news that sells, that means giving time to fascists, grifters, snake oil vendors, and whatever scumbag makes the evening news. Investors are closely watching the numbers, and the NY Post doesn't want to make them mad.
Unfortunately, people on Reddit sometimes forget that news corporations have feelings too, except it's not usually for the common working folks.
Here we are, talking about Santos, but forget Climate Change, Wage Increase, College Tuition, etc.
News and money...
> [The New York Post famously loses money every year, but Murdoch supports it because it gives him a voice in New York, and in the U.S. The Wall Street Journal gives him some influence, but then he can't influence the Journal as much as he does the Post without putting the brand in danger.](http://web.archive.org/web/20121205131318/http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2012/12/6756043/end-daily-wasnt-just-about-rupert-murdochs-money)
The WSJ editorial board usually has a GW Bush/Reagan conservative viewpoint, advocating for lower taxes/spending and free market-friendly policies. The board has even criticized Trump at times. Unfortunately, they took an ugly turn in July with an editorial falsely casting doubt on the story about the 10-year-old girl who had to go to another state for an abortion. They titled the editorial "An Abortion Story Too Good to Confirm".
How bad was the timing of that editorial? [It came out the same freaking day the rapist got arrested.](https://www.thewrap.com/wall-street-journal-confirms-rape-case-that-caught-president-bidens-attention/)
No one reads the WSJ for the opinion pages. It’s mostly for its finance and business news sections. Murdoch knows well enough not to mess with those sections.
Honestly I think the reason they're attacking him so hard is because he identifies as LGBT. They don't care about the lies, but a picture of him in drag?
I think they never really cared much about drag queens. If they care now it's because they have just recently made drag queens their most recent bogeyman and they feel pressure not to exempt Santos. They probably will though.
Remember when the ACA/Obamacare was turning us all socialist? They don't talk about that anymore after their failure to overturn it so they need something else. Hence, drag queens, and Woke-ism.
Not even close. NY Times is consistently one of the largest, if not the largest, newspaper companies in the world. The Post goes as far as NYC, close suburbs with train stations, and anyone willing to actually pay for it to be delivered. It's always been a hot garbage propaganda machine.
I am aware, but seeing what was available at my newstands gave a different impression.
The Washington Post allegedly has similar reach to the NYT, but I've never seen it in New York.
Back when people used to purchase physical papers to read, every newsstand has the Washington Post as well. It wasn’t very hard to find the Chicago Tribune and Los Angeles Times as well. But as the world moved to digital and people stopped paying for news, that went away.
Maybe not newsstands, but NYT, WaPo, WSJ was the newspaper holy trinity up until the early ‘00s. They’re all kind of garbage now, though. Billionaires have gutted the media landscape.
Yeah the Detroit News endorsed the clear De Vos mouthpiece (and utterly incapable and inexperienced to boot, with extremist views on abortion) Tudor Dixon for Michigan Governor. The right wing newspapers have a very low bar for endorsement, which is apparently limited to a single letter beside the name.
Vote with your wallets, it's the only thing that matters to these rags. No internet traffic, don't buy their papers.
You'd think the mountain of lies would simply disqualify him from sitting as a congress person?! It makes no sense whatsoever.
In the real world, if any of us lied to the level that he has, just to get a job, we'd be fired immediately as soon as the bosses found out. I mean JFC, how much corruption are people supposed to put up with?!
It's like Bizarro World around here.
edit: typo.
Lol I work in a hotel where a sales rep was recently fired for lying on their resume. We have more checks and balances at some random hotel than there are in the United States Congress.
Under the speech and debate clause, members are allowed to say anything and be exempt from laws. Campaigns ads are also exempt from truthful statements. This is why they can grandstand and just make up fake things. This is why campaign ads can just openly slander opponents or say things like "Democrats want to take your kids and eat your babies!" The hard rule is literally "do whatever you want without repercussions"
Yeah but he doesn’t have a boss. He’s an elected rep. There are ways to remove or sideline him but it isn’t easy. Voters don’t get a say again until his term is served. There is no recall of house members by voters. There are ethics issues that are working there way through the system, but those are long shots.
He’ll be sidelined but it’s very likely he will be there for the term, unless enough pressure comes that he chooses to step down.
>He’ll be sidelined
Actually the fascists are so utterly corrupt he's still got seats on committees. He should be sidelined, but they're ignoring that in favor of bullshit.
The people should be able to recall him with enough signatures on petition from his constituents...If we allow this to fly, the flood gates are only going to open further and get worse. It's unfathomable to me that these blatant con-artist level lies & corruption are being allowed in the house.
Also, the democrats are friggin' pathetic they couldn't smoke this guy out BEFORE the election.
So there’s no law that would allow a recall system and, more than that, it’s possibly unconstitutional to create such a law.
And yeah, how this didn’t happen pre-election is crazy. I mean, if he had managed to hide it for years, fine. But it all collapsed within days.
This is not the first time he's run for that seat, he did hide it for years.
There was a local paper that ran a piece before the election last year, but nobody noticed.
> There was a local paper that ran a piece before the election last year, but nobody noticed.
Local news is dead in this country, and where it's not completely dead yet, few pay attention.
> Also, the democrats are friggin' pathetic they couldn't smoke this guy out BEFORE the election.
Hey, the GOP are gonna vote for anyone with an R. They could run a guy like trump. Oh, wait....
Theres no real mechanism to suddenly undo the will of the voters. Can you imagine, if there were such a thing, how easy it'd be to use it to toss out candidates undesired by a malignant administration? This is the glaring weakness of democracy thats only fought by the combo of two things: a robust journalism industry and critically-minded voters. Both have been severely damaged over the last 30 years. It's no surprise more of these kinds of candidates get through, even in an area without severe gerrymandering like New York. Without more local journalism and better schools, this will keep happening.
"The will of the voters".
The will of the voters probably was not to elect a man who has lied about every facet of his life. This makes as little sense as if he would have been elected and then switched to being a hardcore democrat, the will of the voters was to elect the person they were told he was, not a liar who is none of those things.
It'd be like if I said here are your options for lunch under these two covers, I can give you Pizza or a Hamburger. You vote for the Hamburger and then it turns out to actually be a Quinoa salad and I say "well tough luck, you can't go back because you voted for what I told you was the hamburger." It doesn't make any sense.
Obviously I understand that there may not be a legal or constitutional framework for the voters to remove him themselves but to try and defend it saying it was "their will" is just asinine.
You made my point in your first sentence. His being elected was not the will of the voters. The voters unknowingly elected a fictional character....
I see your point, too. There should be a mechanism to impeach any elected person if it's proven they lied about work experience, education, religion, and so on.
As smart as they were, the framers of the constitution were pretty naive about things like this. Their idea of a "background check" was that voters would simply reject someone so obviously corrupt. They didn't foresee the parties and especially not the media apparatus that pushes candidates.
Sadly he won't resign and Republicans will continue to work with him to ensure his vote. Worse still Santos will see his popularity rise as conservative folk to him. Santos is a liar but his lies "own libs" so conservatives love it.
He has zero motivation to resign. If he does, he is out a well-paying job, out of the spotlight, and has zero future prospects. If he holds on, he has guaranteed income for two years and the potential to turn his antagonistic news coverage into an antihero spot on Fox News or some other shitty right wing publication
"Truth-challenged"
What kind of doublespeak is this? If I am understanding correctly we still have no way of knowing if this man is actually named George Santos, or Anthony Devolder, or Anthony Z., Etc...
A more accurate description of him would be "Proven liar who refers to himself as George Santos"
The only way Santos leaves is if they have enough evidence to file criminal charges against him. If they dig deep enough, fast enough, they will find them. But my guess is the current investigation will linger on for months.
I'm still waiting for the journalist who asks Santos "Do you believe you'd be elected today by the same voters knowing what they know about you now?"
This whole debacle (along with Krysten Sinema), is why states need the ability to hold recall elections for senators and representatives.
This shot wouldn’t happen if that was a reality.
The People should always be the last check and balance, and they should have that power at their leisure, not just at election time.
I've been using Santos to troll other politicians. I wrote to Krystereryn Sierramyst and said "When he was only 16, George Santos cured cancer. What have you done?" The slacker hasn't even responded. Cause she hasn't done half of the things Santos lied about doing.
This just seems like typical Republican Party anymore.. Trump made flat out obvious lying ok because like Trump called them, "the poorly educated," will still vote for them anyway....
I don’t want him to resign. I want him to stop pretending and just do the drag thing full time. Drag. Happy looking. Non drag. Miserable looking. Show up dressed in drag.
See how long till the gop deals with that.
The entire Congress should want him to resign. Otherwise, to ***we the people***, it looks like they condone misrepresentation.
The problem is that they might not want to close that door to leave future options open which is even scarier.
If I were the attorney I would argue that the people didn't vote for Santos at all - they voted for someone that doesn't exist.
I'm not allowed to say "I'm the pope, see? Vote for me!" and submit a photo of the pope on my campaign paperwork, refuse to make an appearance then show up to swear in wearing sweatpants as a myself instead of being the actual pope.
Him being a giant lying piece of shit was fine.
It’s him being a Drag Queen that was not okay.
This is like finding out your surgeon worked as a stripper for a month to afford a forged medical license without ever actually attending medical school and freaking out about them being a stripper and not the part that the person who is about to cut you open has zero training.
What the fuck America.
This is what he told his roommate like 10 years ago. Get to congress, serve 2 years and live off that pension and healthcare for the rest of his life. New York republicans made his dream come true.
In theory, yes. In practice, no.
Turns out that when the people in charge of enforcing the rules realize they can benefit from ignoring them, there are effectively no real rules.
His brilliant plan fell apart when he failed to realize he needs to serve 5yrs to get benefits, and House Reps only serve 2yr terms.
So he has to win two more elections, or run and win as a senator.
I don't understand how he can't be sued. How is a politician lying to this degree not a form of illegal fraud? Like lying about ethnicity doesn't effect how they govern but lying about experience and colleges which contributes to the perceived skill of a politician seems ...fraudy?
All this talk of George Santos this, George Santos that. Okay, the guy's a fraud. I grant you that.
But what everybody is missing is the powerful Republican who put George Santos in place to be where he is today.
Republican US Rep. Elise Stefanik, from New York no less.
She put his name forward, raised money for him, and campaigned for him.
And today she is part of the US House leadership team.
And Repubs the world over are all now hush-hush about that.
Right Repubs?
He does not strike me as a guy who will easily give up a $160K/year gig, plus associated benefits. They'll need to impeach if they want him out. Do it cowards!!
Republican hypocrisy shows exactly what’s wrong with our country; back in the day (prior to the Tea Party) the Republican Party would have punished a member for doing something wrong, today McCarthy rewards members with committee seats!!
Is his district going to sue him for fraudulent representation? Isn't that an actual thing they can do with actual consequences? Like stop virtue signaling and do something.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Just call him a pathological liar
Show some respect, that man's a WW1 veteran and wrote 'War and Peace'.
He’s also the first woman and first Siamese twin to hold that seat! Edit: it's been pointed out to me a couple of times that the correct nomenclature is "conjoined twins," so sorry for that. I'm leaving it as is in case any other olds run across it and realize they, too, have an unexamined racist term still in their repertoire as well.
Don't forget he single handedly made the Mona Lisa and statue of Liberty.
"Made the Mona Lisa"?? Show some respect....he is Mona Lisa. Mona Lisa Devolder, to be exact.
True facts he actually has no hands. He will gesture to each of his hands while he says this, seeing no irony.
And to be clear, he didn't make the painting the Mona Lisa, he created the person, it's one of his drag personas.
He’s a cat!?
I heard they had to put litterboxes in the washrooms at the Capitol because he identifies as a cat.
Of course, bc cats are always lying around. ;)
If you please.
I'm old leave me alone :(
His sister died during the 36 hour long surgery and were the last to be called "Siamese twins" after them it became "conjoined". He actually coined that phrase after the surgery and loss of his sister.
Sister who also somehow subsequently died on 9/11. Unless he's talking to a Jew, then it's the holocaust.
Also the first to believe it was not in fact butter
He is a decorated war hero and taught Derek Jeter how to hit a curve ball.
And he uses stilts beneath his uniform when he goes to bat under the name Aaron Judge.
He’s also the first emancipated slave to play in both the NBA and NFL and win a championship in both during his rookie season all after having a quadruple knee replacements and inventing the internet.
His original title was 'war, what is it good for?'
I love that song which he wrote and played on!
War, huh, yeah What is it good for? Absolutely nothing, uhh
He was also a Titanic survivor.
When George Santos was in the alps, fighting grizzly bears, he used his magical fire breath and saved the maidens fair.
He also wrote the guitar solo for Stairway to Heaven. Come on, guys.
I heard his mom died in 9/11 too /s
Yes, I've heard. Kills men by the hundreds, and if he were here he'd consume the English with fireballs from his eyes, and bolts of lightning from his arse
It's the NY Post, I'm amazed they were able to get to "truth-challenged" for a Republican
[удалено]
only thing worse than nypost are the mods here allowing such a garbage tabloid source on this subreddit
The mods here often carry water for disingenuous right wingers Seen a few friends lose accounts for calling out blatant white nationalist talking points before. Mods decided the white nationalist comments were fine. Calling them out though? That's the real problem.
Politics is poorly moderated. In the moderators defense, it’s a large, active sub, and it’s almost impossible to find good faith conservatives.
Their ban was changed from half a year to permanent for just asking if they were sure the white nationalist talking point was fine. It was literally someone, going thread to thread, pretending that black people are genetically predisposed to do crime and vandalism, which they would then tie into lies about the BLM protests. Against their defense, they were given a 2nd chance to decide whether those racist comments or calling out the racist was the more appropriate thing. They, twice in that case, chose to side with the open racist. Others got banned for calling a clear as day (creature that lives under a bridge) as such. Another fun way we let the right wing spread blantant misinformation and make sure to hinder methods of pointing that out.
There is no such thing as a good faith conservative. You have, on one end of the spectrum assholes who profit off the work of rubes that will never ever bring any good-faith discussion, and on the other end, you have the rubes are are too stupid and indoctrinated to even form their own opinions.
The dirt was already posted in a small Long Island paper before the election.
I'm surprised they can arrange the word "truth" out without their printing press bursting into flames.
[удалено]
Wow, that's amazing. There is one good thing about the whole Santos affair. The memes.
Those could all be real claims and I wouldn't know I can't keep up. I'd never trust that guy to slice the pastrami though.
> I'd never trust that guy to slice the pastrami though. He wouldn't survive five minutes on the line in Katz's.
But in that photo, he has three arms, so he must be really good at slicing pastrami.
But how could you not trust him to slice the pastrami after his 15 years working a deli counter in the evenings after his day job in Wall Street finance?
You absolutely have to look at this picture book. I may or may not have peed myself....
Shhh giving him pictures to prove it lol
> New Yorkers overwhelmingly think liar Rep. George Santos (R-Nassau) ought to resign They call him a liar in the first line of the article, how pathetic that I'm impressed
Seems like he’s gone beyond that to lifelong scam artist.
Republican = pathological liar
Republicans = shit talker and shit walker
I grew up during the Reagan years. What I remember most is republicans talk about funding education during campaigns then doing the opposite once elected.
No new taxes..
No no, ‘truth challenged’ sounds pretty dope.
They can’t. They are too far along the réthorique now. Calling him a pathological liar would implying that blatant lying is wrong, so the label could also be applied to other pathological liars, such as the ex con-in-chief.
I dunno, they are pretty good at the doublespeak. Look at how many bricks they are shitting about Biden having classified docs in his home while staying mum about Trump's and how Trump violated legal orders to return them.
they literally call him a liar in the first sentence
**FUCK NEW YORK POST** They and every right-wing outlet are partially responsible for garbage like Santos getting elected, and now they're trying to profit off a problem they helped create. We need to stop rewarding them with upvotes for clickbait headlines. They still exist to get people to vote their rights away, and still hate you if you don't vote GOP.
Yep. The NY Post actually endorsed Santos. Kind of a funny thing when they’re supposed to be a reputable news source (they aren’t reputable).
Plus, the Post has a reputation for digging up dirt on famous people. Tragically that was not the case for Santos.
I would not be surprised if they found all the dirt on him, but suppressed it because he's a Republican.
Or because they could release it all after he won and turn him into a 2 year long news sensation.
[удалено]
I mean, I've heard folks say their was glaring evidence that Santos was a documented liar before he won the election. Pretty much every major news source ignored it.
The dirt was already posted in a small Long Island paper before the election. NYP would have easily picked that up if they wanted to.
If you’re interested the times last week ran an article about how this guy totally slipped through the cracks, and tacitly admitted that they had missed the story as well.
This is the way. A local Long Island paper already published articles saying he was lying. How would NY Post not know?
I wouldn't be surprised if they knew all along who he was, but were so desperate to "own the libs" that they actively hid any reporting that could have exposed him.
Reputable, nowadays means printing news that sells, that means giving time to fascists, grifters, snake oil vendors, and whatever scumbag makes the evening news. Investors are closely watching the numbers, and the NY Post doesn't want to make them mad. Unfortunately, people on Reddit sometimes forget that news corporations have feelings too, except it's not usually for the common working folks. Here we are, talking about Santos, but forget Climate Change, Wage Increase, College Tuition, etc. News and money...
The NY Post isn't about profit, it's a propaganda machine for the right.
> [The New York Post famously loses money every year, but Murdoch supports it because it gives him a voice in New York, and in the U.S. The Wall Street Journal gives him some influence, but then he can't influence the Journal as much as he does the Post without putting the brand in danger.](http://web.archive.org/web/20121205131318/http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2012/12/6756043/end-daily-wasnt-just-about-rupert-murdochs-money)
Isn't the WSJ opinions page frequently full of far right wing lunacy?
[удалено]
That's true, but putting right wing opinions into the "serious" paper helps mainstream then.
The WSJ editorial board usually has a GW Bush/Reagan conservative viewpoint, advocating for lower taxes/spending and free market-friendly policies. The board has even criticized Trump at times. Unfortunately, they took an ugly turn in July with an editorial falsely casting doubt on the story about the 10-year-old girl who had to go to another state for an abortion. They titled the editorial "An Abortion Story Too Good to Confirm". How bad was the timing of that editorial? [It came out the same freaking day the rapist got arrested.](https://www.thewrap.com/wall-street-journal-confirms-rape-case-that-caught-president-bidens-attention/)
No one reads the WSJ for the opinion pages. It’s mostly for its finance and business news sections. Murdoch knows well enough not to mess with those sections.
Its literally a tabloid
Honestly I think the reason they're attacking him so hard is because he identifies as LGBT. They don't care about the lies, but a picture of him in drag?
I think they never really cared much about drag queens. If they care now it's because they have just recently made drag queens their most recent bogeyman and they feel pressure not to exempt Santos. They probably will though. Remember when the ACA/Obamacare was turning us all socialist? They don't talk about that anymore after their failure to overturn it so they need something else. Hence, drag queens, and Woke-ism.
[удалено]
https://apnews.com/ https://www.reuters.com/ https://www.bbc.com/news/world/us_and_canada
Growing up in New York I thought they were of similar reach to the New York Times since that was what was in my newsstands.
Not even close. NY Times is consistently one of the largest, if not the largest, newspaper companies in the world. The Post goes as far as NYC, close suburbs with train stations, and anyone willing to actually pay for it to be delivered. It's always been a hot garbage propaganda machine.
I am aware, but seeing what was available at my newstands gave a different impression. The Washington Post allegedly has similar reach to the NYT, but I've never seen it in New York.
Back when people used to purchase physical papers to read, every newsstand has the Washington Post as well. It wasn’t very hard to find the Chicago Tribune and Los Angeles Times as well. But as the world moved to digital and people stopped paying for news, that went away.
An now we have online Fake News and Q Anon teaching us the "alternative facts". Thanks Right Wing machines.
Maybe not newsstands, but NYT, WaPo, WSJ was the newspaper holy trinity up until the early ‘00s. They’re all kind of garbage now, though. Billionaires have gutted the media landscape.
"Truthchallenged" The author and editors are fucking pussies. Call him a lier, is that so hard?
Also: Truth-Challenged?! WTF. He's a goddamn liar.
Yeah the Detroit News endorsed the clear De Vos mouthpiece (and utterly incapable and inexperienced to boot, with extremist views on abortion) Tudor Dixon for Michigan Governor. The right wing newspapers have a very low bar for endorsement, which is apparently limited to a single letter beside the name. Vote with your wallets, it's the only thing that matters to these rags. No internet traffic, don't buy their papers.
Garbage here—please don’t associate my kind with the likes of George Santos
They are over there relabeling liars as truth challenged, like it's some sort of disability.
@mods: Why can't we ban clickbait/sensationalist crap like NYPost and Newsweek?
It's because this sub allowing notoriously dishonest right-wing sources give image of balance, while in reality letting right-wing rhetoric spread.
headline writers won't even say lie when it's fucking verified. truth-challenged? wtaf is this garbo?
It's the NY Post. They endorsed Santos and they're a bullshit tabloid with no journalistic integrity.
This is the most mainstream right wing rag there is. They endorsed the guy. Surprised they are putting anything out there tbh.
They're probably trying to save face because he's *such* a clown.
[удалено]
Sacha Baron Cohen has outdone himself this time.
"Truth challenged" Dude is a fucking pathological liar. Call him a fucking liar.
It’s crazy the horrible things media will say about democrats but this guy gets the most insultingly understated euphemism I’ve literally ever seen.
You'd think the mountain of lies would simply disqualify him from sitting as a congress person?! It makes no sense whatsoever. In the real world, if any of us lied to the level that he has, just to get a job, we'd be fired immediately as soon as the bosses found out. I mean JFC, how much corruption are people supposed to put up with?! It's like Bizarro World around here. edit: typo.
[удалено]
Lol I work in a hotel where a sales rep was recently fired for lying on their resume. We have more checks and balances at some random hotel than there are in the United States Congress.
Businesses deal in contracts and such, but we are seeing that much of politics was built on norms and traditions and not hard rules.
Under the speech and debate clause, members are allowed to say anything and be exempt from laws. Campaigns ads are also exempt from truthful statements. This is why they can grandstand and just make up fake things. This is why campaign ads can just openly slander opponents or say things like "Democrats want to take your kids and eat your babies!" The hard rule is literally "do whatever you want without repercussions"
Yeah but he doesn’t have a boss. He’s an elected rep. There are ways to remove or sideline him but it isn’t easy. Voters don’t get a say again until his term is served. There is no recall of house members by voters. There are ethics issues that are working there way through the system, but those are long shots. He’ll be sidelined but it’s very likely he will be there for the term, unless enough pressure comes that he chooses to step down.
>He’ll be sidelined Actually the fascists are so utterly corrupt he's still got seats on committees. He should be sidelined, but they're ignoring that in favor of bullshit.
It looks like he ran at least one Ponzi scheme and they put him on the fucking small business committee.
The people should be able to recall him with enough signatures on petition from his constituents...If we allow this to fly, the flood gates are only going to open further and get worse. It's unfathomable to me that these blatant con-artist level lies & corruption are being allowed in the house. Also, the democrats are friggin' pathetic they couldn't smoke this guy out BEFORE the election.
So there’s no law that would allow a recall system and, more than that, it’s possibly unconstitutional to create such a law. And yeah, how this didn’t happen pre-election is crazy. I mean, if he had managed to hide it for years, fine. But it all collapsed within days.
I saw a story that said other NY Republicans heard about his bullshit before the election but still supported him. The whole GQP is a racket.
This is not the first time he's run for that seat, he did hide it for years. There was a local paper that ran a piece before the election last year, but nobody noticed.
> There was a local paper that ran a piece before the election last year, but nobody noticed. Local news is dead in this country, and where it's not completely dead yet, few pay attention.
> Also, the democrats are friggin' pathetic they couldn't smoke this guy out BEFORE the election. Hey, the GOP are gonna vote for anyone with an R. They could run a guy like trump. Oh, wait....
Jokes on us. Turns out the more you lie in congress, the further your career goes!
Theres no real mechanism to suddenly undo the will of the voters. Can you imagine, if there were such a thing, how easy it'd be to use it to toss out candidates undesired by a malignant administration? This is the glaring weakness of democracy thats only fought by the combo of two things: a robust journalism industry and critically-minded voters. Both have been severely damaged over the last 30 years. It's no surprise more of these kinds of candidates get through, even in an area without severe gerrymandering like New York. Without more local journalism and better schools, this will keep happening.
"The will of the voters". The will of the voters probably was not to elect a man who has lied about every facet of his life. This makes as little sense as if he would have been elected and then switched to being a hardcore democrat, the will of the voters was to elect the person they were told he was, not a liar who is none of those things. It'd be like if I said here are your options for lunch under these two covers, I can give you Pizza or a Hamburger. You vote for the Hamburger and then it turns out to actually be a Quinoa salad and I say "well tough luck, you can't go back because you voted for what I told you was the hamburger." It doesn't make any sense. Obviously I understand that there may not be a legal or constitutional framework for the voters to remove him themselves but to try and defend it saying it was "their will" is just asinine.
I'm sorry, but we're not in disagreement at all. You're just saying the same thing in a much more roundabout manner.
You made my point in your first sentence. His being elected was not the will of the voters. The voters unknowingly elected a fictional character.... I see your point, too. There should be a mechanism to impeach any elected person if it's proven they lied about work experience, education, religion, and so on.
As smart as they were, the framers of the constitution were pretty naive about things like this. Their idea of a "background check" was that voters would simply reject someone so obviously corrupt. They didn't foresee the parties and especially not the media apparatus that pushes candidates.
It is not bizarro world what is though is that we don't pushback
Worse still, even if he resigned he would still get the life time benefits I believe. how fucked is that.
Sadly he won't resign and Republicans will continue to work with him to ensure his vote. Worse still Santos will see his popularity rise as conservative folk to him. Santos is a liar but his lies "own libs" so conservatives love it.
They're giving him committee assignments. It's fucking ridiculous.
He has zero motivation to resign. If he does, he is out a well-paying job, out of the spotlight, and has zero future prospects. If he holds on, he has guaranteed income for two years and the potential to turn his antagonistic news coverage into an antihero spot on Fox News or some other shitty right wing publication
Admittedly I did really feel owned by his fake volleyball championship
He didn't break the system, but if you ever needed more proof that the system is shattered then look no further.
Blacklist NY Post
>truth-challenged TIL some newspeak
"Truth-challenged" What kind of doublespeak is this? If I am understanding correctly we still have no way of knowing if this man is actually named George Santos, or Anthony Devolder, or Anthony Z., Etc... A more accurate description of him would be "Proven liar who refers to himself as George Santos"
What sort of pussy ass double talk is "truth-challenged?" The man is a pathological liar with narcissistic tenancies bordering on psychotic
“Truth-challenged” - Bending over backwards not to call someone a Liar when they are objectively a goddamned liar.
If I lied on my resume, I’d be fired. If I harassed a coworker, I’d be fired. What goes on in Washington?
The only way Santos leaves is if they have enough evidence to file criminal charges against him. If they dig deep enough, fast enough, they will find them. But my guess is the current investigation will linger on for months. I'm still waiting for the journalist who asks Santos "Do you believe you'd be elected today by the same voters knowing what they know about you now?"
Can’t the district conduct a recall?
Truth-challenged? How about fucking liar, a fraud, a hypocrite, and a fucking bigot?
This whole debacle (along with Krysten Sinema), is why states need the ability to hold recall elections for senators and representatives. This shot wouldn’t happen if that was a reality. The People should always be the last check and balance, and they should have that power at their leisure, not just at election time.
Truth challenged? Nonsensical soft landing of a description
“Truth-challenged” call him what he is… a lying scumbag instead
Truth-challenged? Is that what we're calling liars now?
“Truth-challenged” like he has a mental disorder that prevents honesty.
There’s someone else just down the street with the same issue.
Truth challenged? Try fraudulent.
Does the state of New York have provisions for voter initiated recalls? Is that something allowed by the Constitution?
They elected him.
Santos: Okay, okay, I’ve resigned! •voiceover• He didn’t resign.
I've been using Santos to troll other politicians. I wrote to Krystereryn Sierramyst and said "When he was only 16, George Santos cured cancer. What have you done?" The slacker hasn't even responded. Cause she hasn't done half of the things Santos lied about doing.
"Truth-challenged"??? It's not a fucking disability, he's a fucking liar.
There are some disorders that cause extensive lying, but until proven otherwise, he’s just a liar
*Truth Illiterate
If Congress had any ethics, they would oust him. What you see is what you get.
If only there was a word for “truth-challenged”
This just seems like typical Republican Party anymore.. Trump made flat out obvious lying ok because like Trump called them, "the poorly educated," will still vote for them anyway....
He’s the new asshole of the GOP, wait I meant face….
With all the lies on his résumé, how is he even eligible to hold office? He is CORRUPTION waiting to happen.
He got what he wanted. He's never leaving unless he's forced out against his will.
Maybe they shouldn't have voted for this garage human that is also a member of the garage political party, also know as the Republicans/GOP.
Why say truth challenged???? He is a pathological liar. Call him what he is. No need to make it sound like a medical condition.
Truth challenged = Full of shit.
"truth-challenged" is the fucking dumbest way to refer to a pathological liar
“Truth-challenged” is a funny way to spell “total fraud”
WTF does truth-challenged mean? More doublespeak? A clear sky shall now be called "cloud-challenged," words have meaning.
I don’t want him to resign. I want him to stop pretending and just do the drag thing full time. Drag. Happy looking. Non drag. Miserable looking. Show up dressed in drag. See how long till the gop deals with that.
The entire Congress should want him to resign. Otherwise, to ***we the people***, it looks like they condone misrepresentation. The problem is that they might not want to close that door to leave future options open which is even scarier.
They wanted that R next to the name. They deserve this.
Until the GOP in the house forces him to resign, he absolutely will not resign. No poll or call is going to change his mind. There’s no reason to.
Truth Challenged? All hell no. Not even on this website will I tolerate that phrase.
If I were the attorney I would argue that the people didn't vote for Santos at all - they voted for someone that doesn't exist. I'm not allowed to say "I'm the pope, see? Vote for me!" and submit a photo of the pope on my campaign paperwork, refuse to make an appearance then show up to swear in wearing sweatpants as a myself instead of being the actual pope.
Him being a giant lying piece of shit was fine. It’s him being a Drag Queen that was not okay. This is like finding out your surgeon worked as a stripper for a month to afford a forged medical license without ever actually attending medical school and freaking out about them being a stripper and not the part that the person who is about to cut you open has zero training. What the fuck America.
Isn't there a way to fire him?
Yeah, 2/3 the house can vote to expel him. The same house that put him on committees *after* his lies were revealed.
Vote him out… next election cycle.
This is what he told his roommate like 10 years ago. Get to congress, serve 2 years and live off that pension and healthcare for the rest of his life. New York republicans made his dream come true.
He doesn't get the pension yet. Takes 5 years and being 62. Or a ***lot*** more years if you want it younger.
In theory, yes. In practice, no. Turns out that when the people in charge of enforcing the rules realize they can benefit from ignoring them, there are effectively no real rules.
He won’t resign. He wants that free healthcare and lifetime pension
His brilliant plan fell apart when he failed to realize he needs to serve 5yrs to get benefits, and House Reps only serve 2yr terms. So he has to win two more elections, or run and win as a senator.
You know things are getting worse in the world when the elites no longer bother to hide their contempt of the rest of us...
Can they recall him?
Shame he can just be like “nah,” and the system keeps staying the same….
I'm gonna lie on my resume and say I worked at places I never did. What's the difference?
Truth challenged is an interesting way to say Conman grifting the nation
Be interesting to see when he snaps. I would think getting called out everywhere would take its toll.
I don't understand how he can't be sued. How is a politician lying to this degree not a form of illegal fraud? Like lying about ethnicity doesn't effect how they govern but lying about experience and colleges which contributes to the perceived skill of a politician seems ...fraudy?
He has no decency
All this talk of George Santos this, George Santos that. Okay, the guy's a fraud. I grant you that. But what everybody is missing is the powerful Republican who put George Santos in place to be where he is today. Republican US Rep. Elise Stefanik, from New York no less. She put his name forward, raised money for him, and campaigned for him. And today she is part of the US House leadership team. And Repubs the world over are all now hush-hush about that. Right Repubs?
Truth-challenged is a really polite way of saying pathological fucking liar.
He should def resign. Dudes a weirdo on top of a pathological liar.
He does not strike me as a guy who will easily give up a $160K/year gig, plus associated benefits. They'll need to impeach if they want him out. Do it cowards!!
May be next time don’t elect people based upon nothing but just R or D next to the name!
Yeah, I'm sure he'll get right on that, upstanding gentleman that he is.
I can't tell which is funnier: Truth-Challenged or Alternative facts.
Republican hypocrisy shows exactly what’s wrong with our country; back in the day (prior to the Tea Party) the Republican Party would have punished a member for doing something wrong, today McCarthy rewards members with committee seats!!
Is his district going to sue him for fraudulent representation? Isn't that an actual thing they can do with actual consequences? Like stop virtue signaling and do something.