House gets second chance to expel George Santos, with vote expected
The House of Representatives is expected to vote Wednesday evening on whether to expel Rep. George Santos, the noted fabulist who faces a slew of federal criminal charges related to fraudulent financial schemes, after fellow Republicans from his home state New York had introduced a resolution to impeach the president. it.
Whether the motion to deport Mr. Santos, filed by Representative Anthony D’Esposito of New York, will succeed remains unclear. The resolution would require the approval of two-thirds of voting lawmakers in the House of Representatives, which would most likely require every Democrat to vote to be expelled, and dozens of Republicans to do the same.
The Republicans have such a narrow majority that Santos’ vote remains crucial to their agenda. Speaker Mike Johnson, who was elected last week, has said he does not support removing Mr. Santos without due process. And many members of Congress have expressed concern that removing Mr. Santos from office ahead of criminal proceedings or a House Ethics Committee report would set a dangerous precedent.
But Mr. D’Esposito and a group of first-term New York Republicans in vulnerable swing district seats have said there is ample evidence that Mr. Santos is no longer fit to serve.
On Wednesday, they sent a letter to the entire House discussing their colleagues’ objections and urging them to impeach him.
“This issue is not a political issue, but a moral one,” they wrote, adding: “We agree that this would set a precedent, but a positive one.”
If the measure were to pass, Mr Santos – who has falsely claimed links to the Holocaust, September 11 and the Pulse nightclub shooting – would be consigned to a real place in history.
He would become the first representative since the Civil War to be removed from office without a criminal conviction, and only the sixth member of the House to be expelled in the body’s history.
In recent interviews, New York lawmakers have been optimistic about the resolution’s chances.
“I think we’re going to get two-thirds,” Rep. Nick LaLota, another Republican from Long Island, told reporters on Sunday. “There seems to be a good feeling that enough is enough.”
Wednesday’s vote will mark the second time in nearly six months that the House will take up the question of whether Mr. Santos, who represents parts of Long Island and Queens, should keep his seat in light of a host of felony charges and a ethical research. .
Santos, 35, was first indicted in May on 13 counts of bank fraud, unlawful monetary transactions, stealing government funds and lying about financial disclosures. Last month, federal prosecutors added 10 new charges, accusing Mr. Santos of reporting a fraudulent $500,000 personal loan to his campaign and stealing the identities and credit card information of campaign donors.
The revised indictment came after his former campaign treasurer, Nancy Marks, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud the United States and said in court that she conspired with Mr. Santos to obtain the fictitious $500,000 loan and a number of false declare campaign donations.
Mr. Santos has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
After the first indictment, Democrats tried to force a vote on a resolution to expel Mr. Santos. Republicans, including Mr. D’Esposito and his allies who had called on Mr. Santos to resign, successfully blocked that effort and instead referred the issue to the House Ethics Committee.
The commission, which critics say moves too slowly, has been investigating Mr. Santos since March. On Tuesday, it said in a statement that it was “expeditiously” reviewing the allegations against Mr Santos but would “announce its next course of action” on or before November 17.
Rep. Kelly Armstrong, a North Dakota Republican and former public defender, predicted that Mr. Santos’ deportation would fail because of due process concerns.
“What’s the point of having an Ethics Committee if you don’t let them do their job?” said Mr. Armstrong. He added that he believed Santos should resign, but that in the absence of an Ethics Commission decision or conviction, “it becomes a political vote. It is a very serious step for 750,000 people to not have representation.”
Mr. Armstrong said the conference was aware of Speaker Johnson’s position against the expulsion, and that this was likely to influence how some viewed the vote.
“In the most difficult cases you cannot get rid of a fair trial,” he said. “Now, once you’re found guilty, that changes.”
Still, Mr. D’Esposito and others said last week that Ms. Marks’ plea led them to support another deportation effort.
Mr. Santos has dismissed both the criminal case and Mr. D’Esposito’s resolution as politically motivated. He orphan to a fundraising email in which Mr. D’Esposito’s re-election campaign mentioned the deportation attempts.
“I will not beg for my constitutional rights,” Mr. Santos said wrote on X, formerly Twitter, Monday. “I will let my colleagues make their decision without my intervention.”
Grace Ashford contributed reporting from new york, and Lucas Broadwater from Washington.