208
submitted 1 year ago by ZeroCool@feddit.ch to c/politics@lemmy.world
top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Hazdaz@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

Once again our useless news media covered for another right wing Republican.

Literally the day after he was elected there were already stories about this clown and various bombshells. No one is going to convince me reporters didn't know this information before election day. But as we've seen time and time and time again, our news media will give Republicans a free-pass on things, all while they hold Democrats to impossibly high standards.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

There was one small Staten Island paper that reported on Santos before the election and was ignored.

[-] creamed_eels@toast.ooo 25 points 1 year ago

The only way any of that would matter to the types of people that voted for him would be if there were a “D” behind his name. Otherwise, it’s totally fine

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Preferred, even. Totally preferred.

So much winning!

[-] xantoxis@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

No shit. Everyone and their mom spotted red flags before he was elected. If he had any more red flags he'd be able to open a store that sells red flags.

[-] Deceptichum@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago

Anymore red flags and he could be a moderator on HexBear.

[-] NotSpez@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

“😤” /s

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 2 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Portions of the report, published here for the first time, show that long before Santos' election, questions had surfaced about his marriage, his family's claimed link to the Holocaust, and his alleged ties to "companies that have been accused of fraud and scamming customers."

The report, which runs more than 100 pages, was commissioned in the fall of 2021 and raises similar questions over Santos' campaign finance activities that federal prosecutors have brought up in the criminal case against him, including apparent discrepancies in disclosures to Congress.

U.S. Attorney Breon Peace said Santos "used political contributions to line his pockets, unlawfully applied for unemployment benefits that should have gone to New Yorkers who had lost their jobs due to the pandemic, and lied to the House of Representatives."

The report took aim at Santos' work as a senior executive with Harbor City Capital, noting the Florida-based firm had been accused by the Securities and Exchange Commission of operating as a Ponzi scheme.

The report notes that while Santos was working at Harbor City Capital, the Alabama Securities Commission filed a cease-and-desist order against the company and its CEO "for advertising unrealistic returns on investments that did not exist, along with other fraudulent practices."

Prosecutors allege, beginning in September 2022, Santos spent money donated by political supporters on personal expenses, including designer clothing and car and credit card debt payments.


The original article contains 1,569 words, the summary contains 229 words. Saved 85%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2023
208 points (100.0% liked)

politics

18863 readers
5153 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS